Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Serbian given names

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. Closing in line with several precedents. The article Serbian names covers the topic well enough. Tone 13:07, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Serbian given names

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article has stood for 2 years without having its notability challenged. It is essentially an indiscriminate directory-style list of Serbian given names and I'm guessing its intention is to be an exhaustive list of every given name in Serbia. I feel it fails WP:LISTN and WP:GNG but I'm open to being proved wrong. Spiderone 20:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous consensus to delete:

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as index of articles per WP:LISTPURP and per WP:CLN as complement to Category:Serbian given names, which includes 395 articles. @Spiderone:, I'd hold off on any more such nominations if I were you until the pending ones are resolved, because it may save some time. postdlf (talk) 20:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Serbian names is okay; the exhaustive directory of names is not. It also has problematic inclusion criteria. Is it just for names with their origin in the Serbian language or just any names that are used in Serbia? If it is the latter, then there are potentially infinite possibilities. If it is the former, then names like Anita, Georgina and Lara and several others should be removed for a start. Spiderone 20:49, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is best summarised in this section of policy, which states "As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a directory, repository of links, or means of promotion, and should not contain indiscriminate lists, only certain types of lists should be exhaustive. Criteria for inclusion should factor in encyclopedic and topical relevance, not just verifiable existence. For example, all known species within a taxonomic family are relevant enough to include in a list of them, but List of Norwegian musicians would not be encyclopedically useful if it indiscriminately included every garage band mentioned in a local Norwegian newspaper." This article violates that because it is an indiscriminate list of every Serbian given name and is largely unverifiable. Spiderone 20:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete CLN applies when the list can provide something beyond mere alphabetized links. This article does not, and should not be kept unless demonstrated to provide something better than being a context-free directory. Information such as prevalence can also go at Serbian_names#Given_names. Reywas92^Talk 02:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep: legit list per WP:CLN, WP:NOTDUP states: "building a rudimentary list of links is a useful step in improving a list. Deleting these rudimentary lists is a waste of these building blocks" and WP:AOAL lays out potential advantages. // Timothy :: talk 14:20, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And per appropriate topics for lists, we have "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value, unless they are split into sections. For example, a list of brand names would be far too long to be of value." and "Some Wikipedians feel that 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." This article covers a topic that is too large, unverifiable and, most importantly, has no place in an encyclopaedia. For example, if a couple in Serbia decide to name their new born son 'Logan' would that mean that 'Logan' needs to be added to this list? Ridiculous list that can never achieve its purpose. Spiderone 14:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As Timothy. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 20:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Oleryhlolsson:@Postdlf:@TimothyBlue: I have taken the liberty to dig out as many previous AfDs on this topic as possible. Please can I ask you to confirm that you wish to go against previously established consensus here? It is quite clear that the reasons to delete those previous articles (i.e. WP:NOTDIR and WP:IINFO) still apply here. Spiderone 07:00, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (changed vote): I was reading this discussion Spiderone posted and the mention of "List of Jewish names" startled me. I actually can't believe it didn't occur to me immediately what various lists of names that usually to belong to a particular group have been used for historically. This may not have occured to others as well. I know this was absolutely not in anyway the intention with these Wikipedia lists, but good intentions can be used by those with other than good intentions. This is enough for me to switch to Delete. I doubt there is a policy or guideline to directly support this reasoning, but per WP:IGNORE I think Delete is the best way to improve the encyclopedia. // Timothy :: talk 07:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:06, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Adds absolutely nothing over and above Category:Serbian given names (other than sundry redlinks). Clarityfiend (talk) 23:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.
The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists, which says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." I will show below that "Serbian given names" has been treated as a "a group or set by independent reliable sources".

Sources
1. Lawson, Edwin D.; Shell, Richard F., eds. (1962-01-30). "Serbo-Croatian Personal Names". The Onomastic Treasure of the CIA. Central Intelligence Agency. doi:10.13140/2.1.1735.5042.
  The book notes: "Given names: Approx. 175 listed indicating gender, diminutives, variants and, in some cases, whether the name is Muslim or Serbian. Some names have English meaning."
2. "What's in a Se [text is illegible] Name?". Serb World. Neven Publishing Corporation. 1988. Retrieved 2020-08-10.
  The article notes: "Serbs are given the names of their relatives or a name the family particularly likes, depending on the circumstances. Some of the more common Serbian first names are explained here."
The list is not indiscriminate.

Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information says Wikipedia articles should not be: "Summary-only descriptions of works", "Lyrics databases", "Excessive listings of statistics", and "Exhaustive logs of software updates". This article is none of these, so it is not indiscriminate.

The list might never be complete, which is fine.
It is fine for the list never to be complete per Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists#Incomplete lists:
Because of Wikipedia's role as an almanac and a gazetteer as well as an encyclopedia, it contains a large number of lists. Some lists, such as the list of U.S. state birds, are typically complete and unlikely to change for a long time. Some lists, however, cannot be considered complete, or even representative of the class of items being listed; such lists should be immediately preceded by the {{Expand list}} template, or one of the topic-specific variations that can be found at Category:Hatnote templates for lists. Other lists, such as List of numbers, may never be fully complete, or may require constant updates to remain current – these are known as "dynamic lists", and should be preceded by the {{Dynamic list}} template.

General notability guideline
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the subject to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 07:48, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Cunard - I'm not suggesting that Serbian given names are not a notable topic and, indeed, some of those references that you have found could be used in the article Serbian names; I am simply arguing that an exhaustive list of every single given name possessed by a Serb is unencyclopaedic and shouldn't be on Wikipedia. Spiderone 09:37, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOTCATALOG this article is essentially a repository of contextless data from a source or two, thus it's essentially a "mirror" of phone book like contents. Graywalls (talk) 00:40, 14 August 2020 (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.