Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Extreme Points


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Extreme Points

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

Listcruft to a high extreme.

Odd naming, but it seems to fit with the naming conventions. Raymie Humbert (TrackerTV) (receiver, archives) 02:19, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, "Extreme Points" is not a proper noun, so it should be List of extreme points. Recury (talk) 17:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, i would just like to point out that it is a disabiguation page. That is what a disambiguation page is for - for redirecting people to the page they want. That is ewhy it is list-like.


 * Also, I dont see the trouble with the title. It is a list of the Extreme Points pages so should say so. If you have a better title then by all means change it.


 * This is just my view, thanks you for your concern.--Coin945 (talk) 02:26, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment tagged with now. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 09:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment the creator removed the AfD template; I have restored it. Themfromspace (talk) 09:42, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, this is not even a "list" as is usually referred by "liftcruft". It is just a disambiguation page for navigating the wiki. Nothing wrong with it. --Reinoutr (talk) 09:58, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep highly sensible concept for an encyclopaedic list. No actual argument presented for deletion. Wily D  12:27, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep No reason to delete mentioned other than listcruft, and that policy says nonencylopedic lists should be removed.  I have no idea what that means.  Provided a given entry is appropriate then I would think the list would be appropriate, or whatever this thing is.  And if a given entry is not appropriate, then there are means to remedy that without scrapping the whole list or whatever.  In the absence of a reason to delete and the unchallenged appropriateness--Δζ (talk) 12:31, 6 November 2008 (UTC) of the individual entries, I say Keep.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as there is no good reason given for deletion and the list seems sensible enough on the face of it. However, it is not a disambiguation page, as the entries do not share the same title. However it is mistitled. At the very least, Extreme Points is not a proper noun. Yet, this is not itself a list of extreme points, but rather a list of lists, so Lists of extreme points might be a better title. older ≠ wiser 02:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep with suggested renaming. Links to otherwise acceptable list article are patently not "listcruft." WillOakland (talk) 09:20, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * How do you change the name of an article? I have always wanted to know for others but have never been able to find out how. --Coin945 (talk) 10:59, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Follow the links listed in the welcome message that was the very first thing on your talk page, and you will reach Help:Editing, which has a long list of things that you can do. The welcome message is your friend.  &#9786; Uncle G (talk) 20:55, 7 November 2008 (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.