Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of magic organizations

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 of the debate was NO CONSENSUS, default action is Keep. Babajobu 11:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of magic organizations[edit]

Delete as redundant with Category:Magic organizations -- Krash 21:08, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak (speedy?) keep. Lists are never redundant with categories. The two serve different purposes and can coexist peacefully. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 21:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong speedy keep. MarkSweep is right. WriterFromAfar755 22:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- How is this different from the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of magic clubs? -- Krash 23:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Learn how to use categories. ' ^{(Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!)} 00:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Learn that categories and lists have different abilities and different purposes. Sometimes something is better in one form or the other. In this case, it is useful as a list, as - as it grows - it can incude information about location, date of formation, branch of magic etc, in a way that categories are unable to do. Grutness...wha? 01:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- A excuse to not actually read the articles, then? ' ^{(Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!)} 02:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - definitely. It's a hell of a lot easier finding the one article you're looking for by scrolling through a quick summary of all of them on this list than to have to open, check and read all the articles in a category. Especially if the list grows to, say, 20-50 items. Grutness...wha? 09:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the category is already sufficient. Stifle 12:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Category:Magic organizations is sufficient, and the more noteworthy organizations can be listed there when needed --TStone 14:20, 24 January 2006 (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.