Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Prime Ministers of Australia with facial hair (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 delete. Sandstein 13:37, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Prime Ministers of Australia with facial hair[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

not a suitable topic, never heard this discussed with reference to Australian PMs ... only US presidents Ivar the Boneful (talk) 16:56, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WHY is it not a suitable topic? What policy or policies does it violate? And why should we delete something because YOU have never heard of it? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:13, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because the only sources are a blogpost and a union-bashing "opinion piece" that only mentions facial hair in passing. What's next, List of Prime Ministers of Australia by eye colour? Ivar the Boneful (talk) 17:34, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The policy it vilates is WP:SALAT: "some topics are unsuitable by virtue of the nature of the topic. Following the policy spelled out in What Wikipedia is not, they feel that some topics are trivial, non-encyclopedic, or not related to human knowledge. If you create a list like the "list of shades of colors of apple sauce", be prepared to explain why you feel this list contributes to the state of human knowledge." Ivar the Boneful (talk) 17:36, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Consensus can change, but it is incumbent on someone challenging a prior AfD result to demonstrate that something relevant has changed sufficiently to establish the change in consensus. There's no indication in the nomination, or elsewhere, of anything like that here. --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:59, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:59, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:00, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete At best this is ridiculous. EVERYONE has facial hair. It's a non-defining characteristic. If this exists then why not List of Prime Ministers of Australia with blood. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:10, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is nothing to suggest the previous AfD was incorrect. The nom must demonstrate why a page should be deleted, particularly if nominating an article which has already been kept at an AfD. Simply stating they haven't personally heard of a specific topic does not seem a very credible argument. AusLondonder (talk) 19:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator has expanded on why he believes the page should be deleted in his response to Lugnuts' question above. --AussieLegend (✉) 20:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unless I have come from a different universe, I cannot really see why knowing that Australian Prime Ministers have facial hair would inform us about their policies, their administration plans, their skill in international relations, their terms in government and so on and so forth. Is there such a list for Prime Ministers of other nationalities? Vorbee (talk) 20:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There used to be. They've largely been deleted, for the same reasons. Bearcat (talk) 14:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- a non encyclopedic cross-categorisation. The subject does not meet WP:LISTN as the subject has not been covered by independent reliable sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Absolutely plain ridiculous that Keep was the result of the previous discussion. This is WP:LISTCRUFT. Ajf773 (talk) 05:14, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Silly article, EVERY male has facial hair. Nothing notable about degrees of facial hair growth. The weight of opinion should have resulted in the article being deleted after the previous deletion nomination. Unencyclopedic cruft. WWGB (talk) 10:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; not a topic that we need to maintain an encyclopedia article about. WWGB is right that every adult male has facial hair, making this really a list of every prime minister Australia has ever had at all except Julia Gillard. The only question is whether he grows it out or shaves it off, and that's got nothing whatsoever to do with what's encyclopedically relevant about prime ministers.Bearcat (talk) 14:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:LISTCRUFT, fails WP:NLIST. No way a list of PM's with beards is encyclopedic. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 16:17, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete what is even defined as inclusion level of hair. is Julia Gillard disqualified? what next List of Deputy Prime Ministers of Australia with facial hair? LibStar (talk) 12:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be so hasty to disqualify Gillard [1]. WWGB (talk) 03:23, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Listcruft of the most ridiculous kind. That the previous debate was closed as delete was absurd and a clear supervote, so I don't see a need to demonstrate that "consensus has changed" - consensus was misread the first time. Frickeg (talk) 02:56, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Absurd listcruft. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It's snowing. Carrite (talk) 15:56, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, carrying on from some of the above "deleters" comments, this article is as ridiculous as having an article, say, List of Presidents of the United States with facial hair, oh, oops, wiki has one. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:49, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS LibStar (talk) 00:37, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

yes i know, just highlighting the facetiousness(?) of some of their comments. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:45, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which just goes to show how stupid such a list can be, for it includes Harry S. Truman. Not one of the images in that article shows Truman with facial hair. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:23, 25 September 2017 (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.