Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of last occurrences

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of last occurrences[edit]

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

Completely random and arbitrary inclusion criteria that could never be complete and is hard to verify or even define. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:59, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notable topic, and Wikipedia itself will never be complete. See:
Brahms, William B.; Notable Last Facts: A Compendium of Endings, Conclusions, Terminations and Final Events Throughout History ISBN 0-9765325-0-6
Panati, Charles, "Extraordinary Endings of Practically Everything and Everybody", New York, New York: Harper and Row, 1989
Slee, Christopher, "The Chameleon Book of Lasts", Huntington, England: Chameleon Publishing Ltd, 1990 ISBN 1-871469-31-7
Slee, Christopher, "The Guinness Book of Lasts", Enfield, England: Guinness Publishing, 1994
Lutz, Stuart, "The Last Leaf: Voices of History's Last-Known Survivors", New York [Prometheus Books], 2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs)
Delete How could we ever come up with a suitable inclusion criterion? The last Howard Johnson's restaurant in Michigan closed a couple years ago; is that relevant? What about the last time that there was a blue moon in a month with an "R" in it? The last Hardee's in the Detroit Area? The last train to Clarksville? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 05:02, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per TenPoundHammer. The criteria for inclusion appear to be too diffuse. Parts of this article could be rescued and spun off into separate articles, such as the list of the last known members of extinct species to die, which I think could be legitimate as an article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:08, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Too broad inlcusion criteria for this list. And it is very incomplete. Why does the list not contain all the last winners of defunct sporting events? (This is a rhetorical question. No need for answer). Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 11:19, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As said, criteria for inclusion is far too broad, making this just an endless, indiscriminate list of trivia. Tarc (talk) 14:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The inclusion criteria are rather clear than there are more than 50 sources provided. I don't see how we can simply disregard the five books already cited in the article and in this AfD, all of which demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that this is an encyclopedic subject. Alansohn (talk) 20:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Armburst. Yousou (talk) 21:36, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Has become a collection of trivia with no crtieria for inclusion. Could potentially be a worthwhile article but that seems highly unlikely. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 23:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:09, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Utterly banal and useless original research. Donald Schroeder JWH018 (talk) 03:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with kudos to Mr. Schroeder for summing things up succinctly. No criteria for inclusion makes this an arbitrary trivia amalgam. Carrite (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment - It's not a LIST of anything, it's a compendium of trivia. Carrite (talk) 15:53, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per others' explanations. Roscelese (talk) 00:49, 8 September 2010 (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.