Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/100 greatest Romanians (2nd 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. The consensus and arugments are in favor of keeping this article. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 12:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

100 greatest Romanians
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable, possibly copyvio. cf. Articles for deletion/200 Greatest Israelis. List articles that simply reproduce lists published elsewhere are non-notable. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. As explained at length at the indicated AfD, there is obviously no copyvio at all.  If there were, we would have to delete (and no press could reflect) the results of Academy Award polls, and Gallup Polls, and the like.  The relevant Supreme Court case (Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service, 111 S. Ct. 1282 (1991)) is set forth at the above-indicated AfD.  See also (with the same conclusion) Articles for deletion/100 greatest Romanians and Articles for deletion/100 Greatest Britons; and note that copyvio wasn't even claimed in the failed Afd at Articles for deletion/The Greatest American.  See also the comment at the prior failed AfD by bogdan, that: "It's not a copyright violation. Results of polls are supposed to be objective facts and, as such, they cannot be copyrighted, per Romanian and US law."


 * I note, as well, that this appears to be part of a series of PRODs and 2 dozen AfDs today by the same nom, of many most of the national poll results reflected here.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:09, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I think these lists are fine. And actually they are very good for identifying notable Romanians I have not heard of and browsing.♦ Dr. Blofeld  07:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I am not a fan of any of these lists. Unless they are truly controversial or notable.  This one does not seem to fit the bill.   --Harizotoh9 (talk) 12:09, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I think it can be very useful and informative for someone who tries to learn about Romania and Romanian personalities. Now the Worst Romanians section I think is very subjective and loaded with politics, since most of the listed people are contemporary, including the current president. I would remove that one. --Codrin.B (talk) 15:06, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep It is a notable list --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:59, 8 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. First, I note that at Articles for deletion/100 Welsh Heroes, the closer of the AfD to which the nom points objected to nom's use of his close as precedent.  He wrote: "No blanket declaration about the inherent notability of such lists was made, or even implied, in my closing statement .... And I don't know how much clearer I could have been that copyright issues were not considered as a factor in that close."


 * Second, it is clear as discussed above that there is not any copyvio. In addition, nom's last sentence is simply inapplicable.  As to notability, I agree with the consensus of the editors, a majority of whom have !voted keep.  I also note (as wp:otherstuffexists permits) that we have thousands of lists of people from country x (or city y, or college z), which weren't even the results of polls -- just collections that random editors chose -- and this certainly has greater indicia of notability than such lists.


 * Finally, I note that at the 2-dozen-odd AfDs that nom made of the same ilk most commentators are expressing keen disagreement with nom's parallel nominations. The AfDs, which are running concurrently with this one, can be found at most of the national poll results reflected here.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep just as for the others.Not copyvio, as has been clearly explained above. There is no policy against these lists, and the assertion of the nom does not make policy   DGG ( talk ) 16:08, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.