Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lifespan timeline of Prime Ministers of Singapore


 * 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.  Sandstein  06:55, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Lifespan timeline of Prime Ministers of Singapore

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of WP:GNG; there needs to be evidence of reliable secondary sources comparing the lifespans of these three people in order for a stand-alone article to be justified. Spiderone 14:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  15:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  15:04, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  15:04, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  15:04, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. It also does not seem to meet WP:V as there is only one questionable source for this subject and there seem to not be any reliable sources for this subject. The one "source" that there is is just a wiki on Singapore which is not reliable. So, there are 0 reliable sources for this meaning it fails WP:GNG like the nom said. -KAP03(Talk &bull;&#32;Contributions) 16:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That source is not a wiki. It is an encyclopaedia of Singapore related topics and it is written by people from the National Library. It is a well researched and reliable source, although a tertiary source. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:39, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete; same rationale with the deletion discussions of all lifespan timelines (unencylopedic, redundant to existing lists on the article of parent topic). Mélencron (talk) 06:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I am going to hold off from commenting, but I see that Lifespan timeline of Presidents of the United States exists and it is very similar to this article. In fact, I get the feeling that the article creator possibly used that article as am example. If we are going to delete articles such as these, we might as well delete all of them. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That argument seems to be WP:WHATABOUTX and should be avoided in deletion discussions. -KAP03(Talk &bull;&#32;Contributions) 15:18, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:WHATABOUTX is much more nuanced than that. I am not saying that keep this just because we have another article like that. I am trying to find if this has any encyclopaedic value (and if another similar article had encyclopaedic value and survived a deletion discussion, what is wrong with this article). --Lemongirl942 (talk) 15:30, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as a needless content fork (especially with only three entries) when such details can adequately be covered in the biography pages of each subject. Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:40, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: I have posted notices for more input, , . --Lemongirl942 (talk) 15:41, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep – Informative and does no harm. — JFG talk 01:44, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:ITSUSEFUL and WP:HARMLESS Spiderone  09:56, 28 January 2017 (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.