Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of articles related to children's rights

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 keep. John254 02:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of articles related to children's rights

Contested PROD. Redundant list. It is exactly duplicated by Category:Children's rights. Original author claims that he/she will add a summary of each topic to this list. But why? What helpful purpose would this serve? It's listcruft. The existing category better serves the purpose. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Article would be better titled List of children's rights topics and connected to Portal:Contents/Lists of topics; we have hundreds of these. I'm not certain whether we have a specific WP:MOS related to them, though. It might help if we did. --Dhartung | Talk 08:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:LIST. A well-structured list and a category complement each other. Not an exact duplicate: red links show missing encyclopedic topics. A category cannot do that. Brief summaries are also a valid function. • Gene93k (talk) 09:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wikipedia has an established convention of keeping lists and categories that serve a similar purpose Rotovia (talk) 11:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep I am the primary author, and created this page in order to avoid the cluttering children's rights with an exhaustive list in the "see also" section. Additionally, I will be adding summaries of each topic, and that will add immense value to each entry. • Freechild'sup? 15:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Then why bother with a category at all? We're just duplicating things here and creating more clutter. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 15:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, duplication by the category, and lack of clear inclusion criteria. Intro states "which can or may never satisfy any objective standard for completeness" KleenupKrew (talk) 22:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. How often does it have to be repeated that categories and lists are not redundant to each other? We get several articles per day listed at AfD with this claim, and several times a day it has to be pointed out that this is not a reason for deletion. From the point of view of a reader who wants to use Wikipedia to find out information on this topic this article clearly has encyclopedic value. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Lists of articles in WP are a well-established part of the WP structure. They were not rejected in favor of categories, they coexist as long as people are willing to maintain them. DGG (talk) 00:51, 5 April 2008 (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.