Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths through interference with the anus

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The result was Nomination withdrawn and no calls for deletion are registered. Non-admin closure. Pastor Theo (talk) 11:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of deaths through interference with the anus[edit]

Per WP:SALAT, "Selected lists of people should be selected for importance/notability in that category". The people on this list were not known for their cause of death. In fact, the cause of death is only mentioned once in the articles for both Humphrey de Bohun, 4th Earl of Hereford and Edward II of England. Additionally, there's no inclusion criteria for the list. The "See also" links don't have any real relation to each other, either. Radiant chains (talk) 07:06, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If possible, I'd like to Withdraw this nomination. Radiant chains (talk) 09:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand Of course the cause of death is only described once for each. Death only happens once, and the cause or causes are not needful of being described repetitiously. The list entrants are notable for their manner of death, hence inclusion of the description of it in both biogs and hence also why they've been accepted as notable and referenced inclusions on List of unusual deaths. Every single entry on the latter is a person otherwise notable for activities beyond the notability of their manner of death. Re inclusion criteria, thank you for pointing that out and I'll remedy it without delay. Otherwise, the critique of seealso inclusions is or rather may be a justification for reform and development, not for exclusion and deletion. This is a new article and it needs development time, much the same way that other, even regionally-restricted death-by-cause lists of similarity benefited from:

Move to close this nomination without prejudice until it's had that time of a suggested 7 days.BumLawd (talk) 07:55, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Radiant chains.--ThoseStarsBurnLikeDiamonds stargaze 07:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest you, point-by-point, deal with the refutation of that nomination immediately above.BumLawd (talk) 08:02, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all, but make sure that each individual item is cited. DGG (talk) 08:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to Keep: Original editor has added very specific criteria for inclusion in list. Additional info is well-referenced and has potential for much expansion. Radiant chains (talk) 08:52, 9 May 2009 (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.