Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Danish footballers


 * 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. NW ( Talk ) 15:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

List of Danish footballers

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is literally a category in list form. Every player here - and many more besides - are already listed in, with no additional information presented. The fact that many of the articles listed on redirect to categories or other, more general articles show that there is no need, and no desire, for such a specific 'List of Fooian footballers'. Note, a previous AfD, in which this article was one of multiple listed, resulted in a 'No Consensus' vote. GiantSnowman 15:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. GiantSnowman 15:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's perfectly permissible to have both a category and a list duplicating the same function, because each has its own advantages.  See WP:CLN for detailed reasoning.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  15:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - this list provides no additional information which is not contained by the category of the same name. It is not as comprehensive as the category and is much more difficult to maintain. In short, it is less useful than the category and unnecessary. Jogurney (talk) 15:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you watchlist a category? Because that's one sense in which it's more useful and more necessary.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  16:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I suppose that is true if the list was as comprehensive as the category. These lists are not maintainable and will not be useful even if watchlisted because they will not be as comprehensive at the category. Jogurney (talk) 20:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you add sources to a category? Can you make it sortable?— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  21:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Categories can be sorted with CATSCAN, but they cannot be sourced. However, these lists are unsourced, and I doubt they ever will be. If someone is willing to expand them to include more useful information and to maintain them, I'll change my !vote to keep. Unfortunately, we've had no takers for the past few years. Jogurney (talk) 22:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Your comments are focused on the current state of the article, not its potential. AfD should evaluate the potential state, because perfection now is not required.  In other words, if it bothers you that this list is incomplete and unsourced, you shouldn't !vote "delete"—what you should do is go and complete it and source it. Saying "I demand this is deleted unless someone else does a lot of work to bring it up to my standards" is not collaborative, not constructive, and not appropriate.  We're here to build an encyclopaedia, not destroy it.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  10:11, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see how else to evaluate this article as it's been in roughly the same condition for three years. Over the past 8 months, I've added references to hundreds and hundreds of unreferenced BLPs about football players, so don't lecture me about being constructive or deletionist. I simply don't think this list is worth saving (or that it can ever be properly maintained). Jogurney (talk) 13:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Of the general advantages to lists it seems to me that only the possibility of including red links applies to this particular list, and that feature is a bit marginal, IMHO. Favonian (talk) 16:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Lists and categories go hand-in-hand per WP:CLN.  Lugnuts  (talk) 17:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep per WP:CLN, although this might be a case where common sense tells us a category may be unequivocally better; but IAR should not be invoked lightly.--Cyber cobra (talk) 20:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep is a useful list in-keeping with Wikipedia. Eldumpo (talk) 10:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - the presence of red-links alone leaves me satisfied that this can't readily be converted into a category for now. The addition of other information (sortable by start/end of career date? note whether played for the national team or not? position, at least for goalies?) would mean that the list would still have advantages over the category once the red links are sorted out. TheGrappler (talk) 04:26, 24 August 2009 (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.