Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of entertainers by nickname (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 delete. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} ^Sports! 00:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainers by nickname[edit]

Suggesting deletion because this list fails the very basics of our WP:FIVE pillars as loosely associated trivia, and despite being nominated for deletion previously, continues to fail WP:V as well. Burntsauce 17:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator, this is what amounts to a list of nicknames. Is not sourced, and is just a collection of loosely associated topics. Entertainers' nicknames, if verifiable, belong on the article about the entertainer rather than a wholesale list. ɑʀкʏɑɴ 17:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It's customary to include a link to the previous AfD (which in this case was less than a month and a half ago): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of entertainers by nickname. Deor 18:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've now fully emended the nom. By the way, keep per my opinion in the previous AfD. Deor 18:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOT, WP:TRIVIA, and WP:V Rackabello 18:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Original research, not referenced. These performers are not known as "nickname" artists - there is no coherent topic, just an accidental connection. MarkBul 20:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "The majority of these nicknames are mentioned in the WP articles for the individuals, and I think that's where the sources should be cited. (If they were cited in this list, the citations would obviously double the length of the article.) Indeed, many of them, such as "Bing" and "Bix", are present in article titles. The list is merely a handy reverse directory—and, please, don't jump in with a reference to WP:NOT#DIR because I used the word—of the bynames. Any unsourceable ones can be summarily deleted." Deor wrote that on 3 August and, weeks later, it's as true as it was then. Maybe you can nominate this one again in October. October is Inventory Month at Wikipedia and on one very lucky day... I can't tell you when... every single article nominated on that day, no matter how people vote, will be summarily deleted. Pretty cool, huh? Mandsford 22:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete open ended list that is full of WP:OR. WP:NOT a collection of useless trivia. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 22:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nothing but trivia and original research. Anything verifiable can go in the articles themselves, a list is absolutely not necessary. --Core desat 22:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - OR, unsourced, biased to US celebrities and also to current day. Impossible to maintain and possible BLP violation. Bigdaddy1981 00:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. Totally indiscriminate, stupidly trivial, and a list of loosely associated people whose only connection is having a nickname. WP:NOT#IINFO, WP:NOT#DIR, WP:OR, WP:V, etc. Crazysuit 00:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WP:NOT trivia collection. Hal peridol 02:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 15:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Listcruft, trivia stuff, unencyclopedic. Keb25 15:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. These should exist in the entertainers' respective articles, and as redirects if they are extremely common. Calliopejen1 20:38, 15 September 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.