Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of American soap opera actors

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. A category is the correct method of maintaining this otherwise unmanageable list. List is completely unsourced and subjective. seicer | talk | contribs 22:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of American soap opera actors[edit]

Per WP:LISTCRUFT; this list is unlimited and/or unmaintainable, and most individual soap operas have their own expansive historical cast lists. — TAnthony^Talk 02:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Cliff smith ^talk 02:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:LISTCRUFT, just as nominator says. If the list is restricted to notable actors, then a Category is the correct way of supporting the list. —SlamDiego_←T 08:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The word was omitted, but is implied: it is limited to notable actors, which for lists of this sort means those with a WP article, as this one has. A category and a list are complementary, and there is no reason to decide between them--the list in this case has the advantage of giving orientation and identification by . The sourcing for such lists is taken to be the sourcing justifying the article, and errors on inclusion are dealt with by deleting the article. Given that it seems to be well maintained, I don't see how it is unmaintanable--the evidence seems to be the exact opposite. It's not unlimited, any more than any other list of living people is. That the shows have lists of actors in them is all the more reason for a unified list of t h ons who actually are notable enough to have articles--not everyone in a show is notable. Thus, no valid delete reason given, Listcruf is a word that one can use for any list, and some people do. Fortunately, the policy that lists and categories can both be used is pretty clear, and it would make more sense for those who do not approve of lists as a method of organization to remember that nobody is forced to read them or work on them. DGG (talk) 02:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:My issue isn't notability, because anyone with a Wikipedia article would pass that test. But not only do I think a majority of actors have appeared on a soap at one time or another, but every week more new ones appear. The list is neatly kept and long enough to seem impressive, but hardly complete; it is a potentially infinite and unmanageable list of names. Why not a List of sitcom actors? It's a pointless designation. I have a hard time imagining a scenario where someone would find this particular list useful, whereas I could see a reader looking through an individual show's list of actors and/or characters. I don't normally nominate articles for deletion, but I'm interested to see the consensus on lists such as this one. If I am in the minority, so be it. — TAnthony^Talk 15:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a majority of actors have appeared on a soap (I wouldn't know one way or the other) , that would make it all the m useful to have a unified page listing the, which would indicate the series and the role, and then people could follow up on the appropriate articles. If would also be a specific reason of why a list might in this case be better than a category, which can not give this information, and be in this case much more useful for browsing.DGG (talk) 14:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per items 6 and 7 at WP:LC. Stifle (talk) 16:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wikipedia:Lists (discriminate, encyclopedic, maintainable, notable, unoriginal, and verifiable) and Wikipedia:Do not call things cruft. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I would say strong Keep. But I'm saying delete it because of this edit war I and other editors have had with Danfing.[1] He or she deletes the soap operas that are filmed in Los Angeles from the lists. If an certain actor or actress has worked on soap operas in both New York and Los Angeles, Danfling will edit out the L.A. soaps and leave the New York soaps. Now I do agree with the idea of renaming the article "List of notable American soap opera actors." Maybe limit it to actors and actresses who have performed on soap opera(s) for at least 5 years or more.--MrKing84 (talk) 02:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There are categories for this sort of thing. This article flies in the face of WP:LIST doktorb _words^deeds 19:50, 11 September 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.