Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Golden Globe winners (2nd nomination)

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. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:55, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Golden Globe winners[edit]

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

Unsourced contentfork of Golden Globe Award for Best Motion Picture – Drama, Golden Globe Award for Best Actress in a Motion Picture – Drama, Golden Globe Award for Best Director, Golden Globe Award for Best Actor – Motion Picture Drama and several related articles The Banner talk 08:36, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:02, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:02, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:02, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While the nominator's complaint that it's "unsourced" is completely pointless here, if not incorrect (it's obviously verifiable who won a notable award in a given year, and the name and year of the award is arguably a citation itself), this seems like just some editor's view of the "most important" awards for a given year. So I'm leaning towards this being WP:POV and duplicative rather than a workable summary. postdlf (talk) 13:20, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:15, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Far more useful of a list for anyone who just want to scroll around and see who won things in each category. The other list offer up more details for specific things. Dream Focus 18:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's useful to see that, for example, The Lost Weekend won three of the four then-major awards, which would not be apparent in the individual award lists. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The individual list would tell you that it was nominated for 7 awards, but this one does not tell you that. By the way, the article "The Lost Weekend" does tell you that anyway. The Banner talk 12:22, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It seems useful to have all this information in one place. If readers want to see it in more detail, they are welcome to go to the relevant pages. Tigercompanion25 (talk) 04:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is far easier to add source references than to recreate the tables again in the future. Lack of sources should not be the sole criterion for wholesale deletion of articles or article content. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)^{T @} 13:50, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - useful for navigation. VMS Mosaic (talk) 23:58, 27 August 2016 (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.