Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of superstitions

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. Surprised this one was relisted! Missvain (talk) 17:06, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of superstitions[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)

This list would be endless and there's simply no criteria for this list. I have put this list into AfD after an RfD discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_September_10#List of superstitions. Thanks to Rosguill for WP:NPASR in the AfD nomination of this list. Soumya-8974 (he) ^talk _contribs ^subpages 15:13, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Soumya-8974 (he) ^talk _contribs ^subpages 15:13, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:49, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no reasonable way to control this list to something useable and readable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:49, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm responsible for most of the content by adding it from {{Superstition}}; other efforts have been remarkably incomplete. At this time, I agree that there's no way to make a reasonable list here; many entries are folklore, some are urban legends, and some have no real connection at all (Witch window). {{Superstition}} will also need some serious work. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Split Superstitions are a very common and important part of cultures throughout the world, and so I don't think the article should be deleted all together. However, I do agree it is way too broad and so I propose it should be made into a lists article that splits into different lists for countries and/or cultures like list of superstitions in canada, for example, similar to articles like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_cities_by_country and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_deities_by_cultural_sphere. Most of these articles do not exist yet so they could just be red links for now. Pladica (talk) 01:37, 24 December 2020 (AST)
Delete uncontrollable undefined and unencyclopeadic. It would be 100 years bad luck to keep it. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 11:32, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It list all articles about superstitions, thus aiding in navigation. Category:Superstitions exist already. If something can be put in a category it can be put on a list. Changing it into a table so it could also include information such as more specific region of origin and what it is, would make it far more useful than a category. Dream Focus 13:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:LISTN, numerous books cover superstitions ie. Superstitions (Haining, Sidgwick and Jackson, 1979), Dictionary of Superstitions (Opie, OUP, 1989), Encyclopaedia of Superstitions, Folklore, and the Occult Sciences of the World. (Daniels, J.H. Yewdale & Sons Co, 1903), plus serves as a navigation aid for wikireaders. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:42, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as per Coolabahapple,User:Dream Focus

Also, I seriously doubt moral right of arguments against keeping this list article since Wikipedia has not done away with concept of Lists, Lists seem to serve ease of access and reading function to readers compared to templates and categories, for example Category:Indexes of religion topics has almost 12 list articles and such many does exist on Wikipedia, so why subject of Superstition can not have a list?

Bookku (talk) 09:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:04, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per previous arguments; notable topic, articles requiring improvement are not articles requiring deletion. Can see argument for splitting, as a full list could be unwieldy. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 06:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above comments. This should now be saved. Touch wood. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article meets CLN/AOAL for a navigational list. Needs work (I did a little), but it could be a valuable navigation aid. // Timothy :: talk 11:22, 31 December 2020 (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.