Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of Oman

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. ✗plicit 14:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of people on the postage stamps of Oman[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:LISTN, not a notable grouping. Unsourced since its creation in 2004, incomplete (both pre-independence and after), not of interest to readers (21 pageviews in 90 days). Fram (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Middle East. Fram (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. We have plenty of these kinds of articles, and there appears to be a well-established consensus for their validity as lists. The article's "stubbiness" (or whatever the list equivalent is) and lack of readership are not reasons to delete. AviationFreak💬 16:11, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We have plenty of equally problematic articles, and no consensus about their acceptability. A fair number are already up for deletion, with most heading for deletion or redirection. The reason for deletion is lack of notability, the incompleteness and lack of readership are additional arguments why these are hardly essential elements of an encyclopedia, and indicate that they don't have any real function and will hardly be missed. Fram (talk) 17:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no consensus, why not just post the various kinds of notices that the list should be improved, and see how that goes first? I had been thinking I should spend less time on personal projects and get back to doing more with Wikipedia, but to immediately get sucked into AfD debates about my past work is kind of demotivating. Stan (talk) 04:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We had many similar articles tagged as e.g. "unsourced" for more than 10 years, and no improvement was done at all. This one was prod'ded (not by me) in 2009 already for "not notable", and nothing was done to improve this one either. Fram (talk) 08:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oman-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 20:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is an unsourced article. The requirements to create a list go to the length of basically requiring it to be a subject that has been considered as a group in reliable sources, which means we need sources. It is time to rid Wikipedia of the excessive levels of philatelycruft it has.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete how is three people even a "list"? No sources, barely any content. Same problems as most of the other "list of people on the postage stamps of X". Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing indicates we need such a list. There's not any independent coverage of the list as such, rendering this WP:OR. Jacona (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2022 (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.