Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of lists of lists (5th 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. WP:SNOW. postdlf (talk) 14:45, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of lists of lists[edit]

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

Fails WP:DIRECTORY. Pages in this list are only related by being list articles on the English Wikipedia. TetraNomic (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 15:54, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – This doesn't seem like a very good reason to delete a navigation tool. The argument stems mostly from a "rules for the sake of rules" mindset, yet even there, I'm not sure it's an entirely valid argument. Master of Time (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Serves a useful purpose in helping people to find the topic they want by narrowing it down. RileyBugz ^会話 _投稿記録 18:33, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this kind of navigation can be useful for people working with Wikipedia at some scale. The previous four AfDs confirmed keep, and I wouldn't expect this one to go any differently. Mortee (talk) 18:54, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - While the title sounds odd, this is actually quite a useful page for navigation as other users have argued. Dunarc (talk) 19:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to WP:PEREN. Nom misunderstands WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Jclemens (talk) 19:48, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – per WP:LISTPURP as a very valuable navigational aid on Wikipedia. This is evidenced in part by the 31,153 page views that page has received in the last thirty days as of this post, which demonstrates that the article is being well-utilized. Deletion would not serve the encyclopedia well. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, initially i thought this might be some sort of Monty Python sketch (a fellow going into the list of lists of lists office looking for the person who administers a specific list and the bureaucratic chaos that ensues), anyway this a keep, in line with the above.Coolabahapple (talk) 02:18, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all the above. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:58, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:DIRECTORY, which says: Wikipedia encompasses many lists of links to articles within Wikipedia that are used for internal organization ... Wikipedia functions as an index or directory of its own content. Certes (talk) 10:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Northamerica1000's arguments. Sario528 (talk) 12:27, 7 August 2017 (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.