Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Hollywood Republicans (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 Delete.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 03:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

List of Hollywood Republicans
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This should almost be a speedy, as it basically a recreation of the article deleted here, but it sort of survived a convoluted AFD before, so here we go again. This article is completely unsourced, and doesn't define either the Hollywood or the Republican aspects. Is it only actual members of the Republican party? Anyone who's expressed right-of-center views? Anyone who has ever voiced support for a single Republican candidate? Anyone who has voiced opposition to a Democrat or a left-wing cause? If it were to clearly define that it is only actual members of the Republican Party, we might have something (assuming we could also define who is "Hollywood" and who isn't), but in that case we'd need a reliable citation for each and every entry being a confirmed member of that party. Right now there are zero such citations. Even if it could meet that criterion, the article is still of questionable usefulness, and another one of those potentially endless lists. There's a reason why there's no List of Hollywood Democrats page. Anyway, the new name aside, this article has all the problems of the earlier deleted article, without any of the sources. I fail to see why it's here. R. fiend (talk) 06:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as unsourced, many entries likely speculation, re-creation of previously deleted material under a new name, and questionable encyclopedic value. KleenupKrew (talk) 08:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete lacks reliable sources and some falls into original research territory Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 11:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete "This is a list of known members and/or supporters of the United States Republican Party from the Hollywood entertainment community. This list includes actors, actresses, directors, writers, and famous support personnel. Genuinely questionable entries may be deleted."  This actually is a silly, name-dropping list of celebrities whom the author is pretty sure are Republicans.  The comments after each name aren't made to prove that someone's a Republican, but to prove that these are famous names.  Yes, we know that Desi Arnaz was Ricky Ricardo, and that Hugh Beaumont was the Dad on Leave It To Beaver; the rest, however, is probably based on "I read somewhere that they donated to Ike's campaign".  I'm pretty sure you're right about Ronald Reagan and Nancy Davis.  Unsourced, uninformative, and uncertain list.  Mandsford (talk) 15:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.   --  Beloved  Freak  15:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete speculation --Pustefix (talk) 18:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lists (discriminate, notable, and verifiable). Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 18:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable.--Berig (talk) 18:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per CLN. If it lacks sources now, they can be added.  I find it extremely difficult to believe that there aren't at least 3 or 4 entries that can be sourced in this list.  Celarnor Talk to me  19:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * How does adding sources for 3 or 4 make the 100+ others any better? Or do you want to limit this to 3 or 4 sourced entries? The problem is, as we saw with the previous incarnation, that marginal statements of "support" for a Republican does not make someone a member of the Republican Party, which is what this is supposedly a list of, according to the title. The only people who really should be on this list are people who can be clearly established to be members of the party, and that is not easy to do. Are we to have one for the Democrats as well? -R. fiend (talk) 20:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It's possibly a decent topic, although I have to say possibly, because there are thousands of Hollywood celebrities, some of whom are Republican, some who are Democrat, and most of whom don't do anything newsworthy in politics.  This, however, is a good example of what "original research" is, and why O.R. isn't acceptable in an encyclopeda.  There are 100 names on this list, and not one lousy source.  It's not good enough to assume that everyone knows Charlton Heston was a Republican or that everyone knows that Buddy Ebsen did a commercial for a Republican Congressman.  If only 3 or 4 entries can be sourced our of 100 names, then it's not going to be a reliable list.  Mandsford (talk) 22:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Good idea for a list, but poorly executed. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Since most of the people on this list are alive, the list has to adhere to WP:BLP.  I'd say that means that every entry on the list has to be properly referenced, and there are currently no references at all.  I suppose references in the linked articles would be OK, too, but I did a spot check of about half a dozen people on the list, and only one (Drew Carey) had such a reference.  If this list was replaced by one that had an appropriate citation (either in the list or in the linked article) for every living person listed, I'd change my !vote to a "Keep".  But as it is, I think the list contains at least as much speculation as fact (and sometimes the speculation is explicit, as in "blue dog Democrat [but] still a supporter of Republican Policies."), which isn't appropriate (particularly for living persons). Klausness (talk) 11:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Completely unsourced, potential WP:BLP minefield and also impossible to maintain as people do change political affiliation, believe it or not. If Democrat, Libertarian, etc. versions also exist, bring them to AFD and I'll support deletion of those, too. Discussion of one's political beliefs could be considered a viable part of a biographical article, but in this form it's too easy for someone to add a name willy-nilly, or misinterpret information (opening WP:NOR issues). 23skidoo (talk) 22:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete there is a precedent and some good arguments here. The political affiliation of any celebrity is best mentioned just in their biography. Vishnava (talk) 16:46, 22 April 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.