Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people from Pennsylvania

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. postdlf (talk) 13:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of people from Pennsylvania[edit]

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

This is an extremely WP:INDISCRIMINATE list better covered by a category tree. There are likely other similar lists that I will nominate if this nomination is successful. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:22, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:54, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:54, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Nomination fails WP:CLN, where categories and lists go hand-in-hand to aid navigation for the reader. I don't think it's indiscriminate either, as it has a clear definintion - notable people from Pennsylvania. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @Lugnuts: Please explain how this passes WP:DOAL #6, part of the guideline you linked. Lists are explicitly discouraged when they cover groups so large that a list is impractical. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 15:27, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DOAL #6 states "...e.g. a list of all people from a particular country..." Last time I checked Pennsylvania was not a country. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lugnuts: That's one example of an overly-large list. Pennsylvania is larger and more populous than many countries, so the spirit certainly applies. Examples =/= the entire scope of the bullet point, obviously; that's not how guidelines work. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:28, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's not an either-or decision. Otherwise we would be deleting thousands of lists that are also over-lapping with categories. And it lets you do things you cannot do with a category. Like indicate the city or county. And if you want to you can add photographs. And if someone is notable but does not yet have a wikipedia article you can add their name with footnotes showing that they belong on the list. You cannot do those with category. Maybe user:DGG can explain why we have both, because he seems expert on this. 2604:2000:E016:A700:C9B4:95C3:F2C4:D63A (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Lists and categories are complementary. The virtue of categories is they are automatically constructed, and aid maintenance of articles. . The virtue of lists is they can a little identifying information about each item to put it in context, which helps people looking for something specific whose exact name they may not know, and also help browsing. I think almos tall categories except the very broadest benefit from a corresponding list, and almost any list of more than a few items benefits from a corresponding category. If this nomination is successful, it would imply a major change in our policy for lists. An isolated nomination isn ot the way to do it. DGG ( talk ) 04:16, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @DGG: A test nomination is how I'd describe it, to determine whether a broader nomination is worthwhile. The reality is that this list, if expanded, would be absurdly large. This isn't a change to existing policy. WP:DOAL #6 states that lists generally shouldn't exist for "a list of all people from a particular country who have Wikipedia articles". Pennsylvania (and other states) are certainly as big as some countries. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 15:24, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly notable list topic and invalid reason for deletion. Smartyllama (talk) 15:09, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:People from Pennsylvania. This list is also a very valuable navigation aid for Wikipedia's readers, as per WP:LISTPURP. For example:

This list article has received 6,735 page views in the last thirty days, whereas
The category has only received 46 page views in the last thirty days.

– Oftentimes, people just don't use categories very much. Also, if the list becomes too unwieldy in size, it can always be WP:SPLIT. North America¹⁰⁰⁰

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.