Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of Lithuania

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. Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 22:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of people on the postage stamps of Lithuania[edit]

[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)

Sourced only to a catalog. Per WP:SALAT, there is no evidence that the underlying subject of "lists of people on postage stamps" is a notable one. There is no proof beyond mere catalog listings or articles about certain people that mention "oh yeah, they were also on a postage stamp". This is like saying that every name and business listed in an old phone book is worth listing just because you were able to find a copy of the phone book as a reference. Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that ever existed, and in all of these similar AFDs, not a single person has given a single, policy-driven reason to keep them. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:03, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Lithuania. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:03, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- - So if I decide the set of buildings pictured on stamps of the US is notable, and go find a complete US stamp catalog that lists all these stamps, and then cite every building on my list to the catalog, that would very an OK article? I do not think so, and I am not really convinced these lists are any different, except that the first person who thought they were a good idea acted on it by creating such a list in early 2002 instead of mid-2022, well and that person did not include any sources at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the same reasons given in all the other stamp lists. A referenced list of stamps issued by a country is notable. This list is referenced. I also question whether picking off these lists one by one is a suitable use of anyone’s time. All of these similar articles should be discussed together in a more appropriate forum. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 22:51, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PERX, WP:ITSNOTABLE, WP:ILIKEIT. None of these are valid arguments. It's "referenced" to a stamp catalog. How do we know the catalog is accurate? What makes the list worth cataloging? Not everything has to be a list. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I said above why I think it is notable. A stamp catalogue is a reference. A country has officially issued the stamps. That makes it notable. I’m not particularly interested in the topic personally but I also don’t think referenced lists need to be deleted or that it’s a great use of everyone’s time to respond to all of these individual deletion nominations. Give it up and start a policy discussion somewhere. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 23:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A referenced list of stamps issued by a country would be an indiscrminate list. That is not what this article is though. It is a referenced list of a sub-set of stamps issued by a country. We have no realible sources that show that this set of stamps as a group are worth creating a referenced list covering.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:35, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. An organized, referenced list of items issued by a specified country is quite obviously not indiscriminate. A commander's insistence that the Baltic states don't deserve coverage because Stalin illegally occupied them is just contemptible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.149.176.48 (talk) 14:46, 17 June 2022 (UTC) — 166.149.176.48 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Where the hell did anyone say that? Might want to lay off the WP:NPA Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your buddy Lambert says that regularly. Just yesterday he mutilated an article about the head of the Ukrainian government-in-exile in the 50s wasn't Ukrainian. He's tiresome and offensive. 166.159.112.14 (talk) 16:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What was said in another AFD has no relevance here, especially not a loaded and baseless accusation like that. Also, implying that Mr. Lambert and I are in cahoots is laughable. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked that people stop referring to me as Lambert and refer to me as Mr. Lambert. No one is arguing that this list should be deleted because of Lithuanian's status at any given point. We are arguing to delete it because this type of list does not meet general principals for lists. To try to turn this into a debate about the national status of Lithuania at any given point is unacceptable. As is the attempt to bring up issues that have nothing to do with this discussion at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Since everything on this list happened before 1940, we do not need to consider post-1940 events at all, so I am not sure why someone would bring them up. A countries own official listing of its own stamps would seem to be a primary source, and Wikipedia is supposed to be based on secondary sources. Anyway if the listings of all stamps are usable that would mean we would have List of all stamps of Lithuania, which we do not and this is not. This is a list of the stamps issued by Lithuania that pictured people. Why that sub set is notable, but not any other possible sub set? I still am not sure. Especially since one of the few sources that I have actually seen brought to bear on this subject mentioned some stamps showing people, and some other stamps showing places. It remains a great mystery to me, and some of the explanations fall flat. Lists have a clear set of criteria, and not every list one can find somewhere in eome publication is suitable to be copy and pasted into Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:38, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Trivia, does not meet wP:NLIST. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:40, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly fails WP:LISTN LibStar (talk) 07:21, 20 June 2022 (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.