Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Italian American mobsters


 * 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. -- jonny - m t  16:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Italian American mobsters
AfDs for this article: 


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

Redundant with Category:Italian-American mobsters. This cannot be allowed to contain redlinks anyway, as redlinks would mean people being called "mobsters" without citations and would violate WP:BLP. The list isn't great from a BLP standpoint anyway, as any references are on the articles not the list, so at a glance at the list we can't tell which entries may not have reliable citations that they are mobsters. The advantage of the category here is that the citation and the decision to include are in the same place. Docg 21:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agreed this is better handled with a category as a list like this would invite indiscriminate additions of names and create a WP:BLP nightmare. Categorizing works better because the articles listed in a category should under BLP contain the citations, etc. necessary to legitimize someone being given this label. As it stands now if I wanted to I could add the name of a teacher I didn't like in high school and no one would be the wiser. 23skidoo (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Most of them are dead. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It's not much more than what's already found in the category. The only additional information on the list is the nicknames.  Mandsford (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * keep A list is different from a category and serves a different purpose. It is ok in WP to have both lists and categories on the same subject.  People like me maintain this list by removing redlinks and/or by moving them in the talk page, pending either WP articles or good references.  This list can have redlinks with proper references so the premise of the deletion argument is false. Hmains (talk) 02:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak keep as this is not a well-formed list, having minimal information (some nicknames and birth/death dates) beyond the category. It's also scoped by ethnic grouping, but this is a case where the grouping is generally voluntary and, uh, notable. Not sure what it provides that the other more narrowly scoped lists do not. --Dhartung | Talk 04:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment This list was originally created from a category which I believe was the result of a CFD consensus but I cannot find it and I cannot recall the details because that happened nearly three years ago. Personally, I don't see the point of both the category and the list because they are are discriminatory based on race and nationality. RedWolf (talk) 07:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If this list is kept, I will remove all mentions of living people that are not referenced from reliable citations ON the list itself.--Docg 08:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You could be helpful by improving the list or you could be destrutive by just deleting items. Your plan is destructive and unhelpful.  Hmains (talk) 03:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Just squeaks in but needs a good wash and brush-up. Plutonium27 (talk) 12:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I think that a list that matches proper names and nicknames is useful in this instance.  Many readers may only know the individual by a nickname they see in a movie or on TV.   In addition, if you look at indictments and legal papers on Cosa Nostra figures, they almost always include the nicknames. As far as being discriminatory, the core of the Cosa Nostra was based on discrimination against anyone who was not Italian. Regarding vandalism, any list in Wikipedia is fair game for vandals; Hmains and Glasgow have indicated their willingness to police this list and I will help also.Rogermx (talk) 01:46, 26 March 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.