Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Breton writers

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 Keep (NAC) RMHED (talk) 22:54, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Breton writers[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Simple alpha-list better suited as a category. See Category:Breton writers. No inclusion criteria, and no means of verification. I googled a handful of random names here which failed all notability guidelines. There may be nonsense entries here, but we have no way of knowing. –Moondyne 00:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. — Jujutacular ^T · C 00:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Jujutacular ^T · C 00:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The existing Breton writers category should be sufficient, particularly in view of the surplus of redlinked entries. Warrah (talk) 16:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Categories and lists are complementary, and there is no reason not to have both. Lists have the particular advantage of providing some information about the material in which they appear, thus facilitating identification and browsing. This hasnt been done yet, but it needs time to develop. Browsing is a key function of an encyclopedia. As a general rule, for topics like this, if there is a category, there should be a list DGG ( talk ) 03:13, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per DGG.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per DGG. Why are so many people against lists? Joe Chill (talk) 00:24, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per DGG UltraMagnus^speak 11:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Looks like a perfectly valid and useful list to me. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:48, 4 November 2009 (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.