Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of horror film killers (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was procedural closing to relist articles individually. ●DanMS • Talk 05:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of horror film killers[edit]

Like many other "List of..." articles, one that is too broad, and could be replaced with a category. Listcrufty indiscriminate collections. Similarly, I am nominating:

If it were something like Female Villains in Fiction, these would be all right: as such, they are highly speculative, too broad in scope, and (as said above) some could be replaced with cats. David Fuchs^(talk) 00:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: It appears that similar articles were (in the past few months) nom'd, however most were speedy-closed due to non-reasoning by the nominator.

Comment -- I was just about to say delete with a good argument against the first list. Then you added all the others and now there are too many to decide in one afd. Saikokira 01:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are all the same in terms of why they shouldn't be on Wikipedia: what goes for one goes for them all, even though they are in varying states of completeness and quality. David Fuchs^(talk) 01:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy close -- To quote, List of people with epilepsy is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community, etc. Including that list with others that have no similarity has undermined your whole nomination. Instead of acting on the comments of afd regulars, you're still trying to justify this afd. Saikokira 03:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy close and relist individually. Personally, I think that List of people on the autistic spectrum and List of people with epilepsy should stay, since a.) they're the only lists that are sourced, and b.) they don't seem to be a non-notable juncture. I think that List of female supervillains could be renamed something like Female villains in fiction if sourced. The rest should be deleted. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 01:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a question of "non-notable juncture"; how do you decide what goes in List of people with epilepsy? By its very name, it could contain almost everyone, and would become too long and manageable. On the other hand, it could be turned into a category. David Fuchs^(talk) 01:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep with no prejudice against individual relisting. I believe these lists are too widely varying in their merits. Someguy1221 01:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree that these should be individually listed and judged according to their merit. For the record, I will be inclined to keep the sourced lists; that's the main (and probably only) advantage they have over categories. Cheers, Ian Rose 02:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Relist please...I think most of these should be deleted, but each should be judged individually Corpx 03:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relist individually. The links between these articles are not close enough for one disucssion. Carom 04:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.