Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people from Hobart

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 merge to List of Tasmanians. Mango juice^talk 15:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of people from Hobart[edit]

WP:INDISCRIMINATE at its finest. We do not need a list like this. A category might work. seresin ( ¡? ) 21:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

delete the category already exists and is more comprehensive Category:People from Hobart. The two may be using different criteria eg Jim Bacon is in the category but not on the list presumably because he was originally from Victoria. On the other hand Martin Bryant is on the list but not in the category. Nick Connolly (talk) 21:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Beloved Freak 23:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- Beloved Freak 23:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or if deleted create appropriate sub-cats This page does provide the added benfit of organizing people by area of notability which the cat does not.Insearchofintelligentlife (talk) 02:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, nothing wrong with this per WP:CLS. Many, many cities have list of people from City articles. They are not indiscriminate, they are lists of notable people who have a substantive connection to the city. (I really just don't get this bias against list articles.) --Dhartung | Talk 06:25, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Merge to List of Tasmanians. I think people consistently fail to understand that lists are not going to magically disappear and serve functions categories don't. That said I think this might be a case where it makes sense to merge.--T. Anthony (talk) 14:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Treasure hunter Mel Fisher and former Miami Dolphins linesman Bob Kuechenberg are from Hobart, Indiana. Does that count? I agree with Tanthony that it would make more sense to merge this into List of Tasmanians, since Hobart has 40 percent of that island's population, and the next biggest town (Laurenceton) has about 70,000 people. Mandsford (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Laurence-what? :P -- Chuq (talk) 01:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of Tasmanians to avoid duplication and per the exact population reasons that Mandsford listed TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 18:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Dhartung and I echo his puxzzlement about the bias. Lists and categories do different things and both are valid. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 00:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge There's no real need for separate lists for Hobart and Tasmania. ¿SFGiДnts! ^{¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review!} 22:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge there is no real need for two lists. --bdude (talk) 03:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - not delete. (Lists in general can and) the list already shows more than category, additional short information and people are segmented according to their fields of notability. That helps more than category. On the other hand arguments for merging with list of Tasmanians sound convincing. --Ruziklan (talk) 12:49, 25 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.