Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TENNIS Magazine's 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS Era

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. Sr 13 08:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TENNIS Magazine's 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS Era

Wikipedia is not an indescriminate list of things. This information, in and of itself, is not worth its own article on Wikipedia. The Evil Spartan 17:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Also might be a copyvio, btw. Tempshill 17:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this is a copyright violation. 86.137.121.170 18:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete A list is not a copyright violation, but a report of what was in the magazine, unless we also use their formatting and other text. But I don't see the point, given that we have articles on all of them; if it is worthwhile, a category would be better DGG 01:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, this most definitely is a copyright violation, as it is merely a repetition of the magazine's intellectual property. The production of the list was based solely on the opinions of the individuals involved in creating the list, it is not a factual list, but a compendium of opinion. Corvus cornix 01:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Copyright violation. ---CWY2190^T^C 03:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Whether or not it's a copyvio - which despite a huge number of these types of articles appearing at AfD, no one has come up with a definitive answer for - it's not encyclopedic; one source's opinion on who or what is the "best" of something generally is not encyclopedic unless it's picked up in a bunch of other media, like Time's person of the year. Carlossuarez46 18:50, 6 June 2007 (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.