Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of teenage parents

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. WP:SNOW. postdlf (talk) 13:32, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of teenage parents[edit]

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

Total waste of server space, and I do not see how it is even remotely encyclopedic. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. A ridiculous article. Teenage pregnancy simply isn't notable - it was almost the norm in many societies until recently, and may still be so in parts of sub-Saharan Africa for instance. No chance whatsoever of ever being complete, and completely irrelevant to the notability of almost all it could include - which makes it a violation of WP:BLP policy from the outset. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete To say "ridiculous" is an understatement. Andy covers some of the major reasons (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Teenage pregnancy is notable, but the list was a trivial, WP:BLP-violation mess that has also been removed from the Teenage pregnancy article twice (including once by me; see here and/or here for backstory with regard to my removal). And titling it "List of teenage parents," without the word famous that was included in the title before, leaves the door open for this article to include any non-notable teenage parent that was reported in the news. Sure, the lead currently specifies that the list is "a partial list of historical figures and modern celebrities who became parents before the age of 20," but that can be easily reworded or removed to widen the scope of the list. Also, the talk page should be kept this time if the article is deleted; it assists the record of the article having been deleted and serves as a record for past discussion about that article. Flyer22 (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
delete for all the reasons given above: even if limited to the "famous" it is still an attractive nuisance for BLP violations, and in any case it isn't historically notable. Mangoe (talk) 22:58, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this BLP train wreck. Zad68 23:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete per AndyTheGrump. Way too inclusive a criterion for historical figures. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above and BLP concerns. Ansh666 06:13, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per AndyTheGrump and other arguments outlined above. Finnegas (talk) 10:20, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:BLP. I hate lists that seem to exist solely to shame the subjects upon it, and this is one of them. Nate • (chatter) 00:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WP:BLP grounds. みんな空の下 (トーク) 00:50, 11 July 2013 (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.