Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of McGill University people


 * 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. Core desat 07:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

List of McGill University people

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article fails to cite sources. Delete' J 23:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sourcing can be trivially obtained for this sort of thing, including via the bluelinked articles, and that's what tags are for. --Dhartung | Talk 00:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This issue of references - or lack thereof - on lists of university people/alumni has been the subject of discussion the talk pages of List of University of Saskatchewan alumni, List of alumni of the University of British Columbia, WikiProject Education in Canada and Verifiability in "Lists of People" discussion in WP:BIO's Talk page. Thus far, there has been no consensus. Until such time as one is reached, I suggest application of the reference tag. This was done for the List of alumni of the University of British Columbia - I see no reason why List of McGill University people should be treated differently. I must add that this matter is not particular to Canada. There are well over 100 similar lists concerning non-Canadian universities. The vast majority are either partly referenced or completely lacking in references. Victoriagirl 03:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * See WP:WAX. J 03:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you please indicate to what within the essay you are referring? Victoriagirl 03:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC) Comment I see now that the link provided is intended to point to the "What about article x?" section in the Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions essay. I make no such argument, rather I note that lists of university people/alumni has been the matter of some discussion. Again, no concensus has been reached as to the role of sources - indeed, when linked to other Wiki articles their very necessity has been questioned. Again I draw the comparison between List of alumni of the University of British Columbia and List of McGill University people. Why is a reference tag considered sufficient for the former, but insufficient for the latter? Victoriagirl 05:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Too bad. The article MUST cite sources, and that simply isn't being done, so it should be deleted. It fails the policy of verifiability. J 15:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment While the list must cite sources, there has been some debate as to whether an entry in a list must cite a source when the linked article cites verifiable sources which justify the inclusion. Indeed, an RfC was made on this very issue at Talk:List of alumni of the University of British Columbia. As yet there has been no consensus on the matter - not at Talk:List of alumni of the University of British Columbia or |Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Education in Canada or at Talk:List of University of Saskatchewan alumni. There has been no response to  proposal by Jdlh at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). The issue has not yet been raised on the discussion page of the article in question. Victoriagirl 16:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * With proper sourcing, a list such as this one can aspire one day to be a featured list. See, as one example, List of Georgia Institute of Technology alumni. Failing to cite sources is not a reason to delete, given the potential in this case. Keep. --Paul Erik 03:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep No insurmountable problems here. Zagalejo^^^ 04:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: I cannot see why this would be proposed for deletion. Editors have taken considerable effort to put this list together. There is a "unreferenced" tag on it &mdash; a much more respectful way to approach the lack of references, IMO. If we were to go around deleting all the articles without references, WP would lose a great deal of worthwhile content. That is unconscionable. Sunray 07:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. "The article fails to cite sources" is not itself an acceptable deletion rationale. An article that isn't verifiable is different, but an article that isn't verified needs tagging, not deletion. AndyJones 09:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The article cannot sit there forever not having any sources. There has to be a time limit. J 15:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * {sofixit}? AndyJones 16:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No there does not have to be a time limit. This encyclopedia is written/edited by volunteers, not robots. Sunray 22:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Wikipedia isn't on a deadline. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:DEADLINE. Rray 00:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It doesn't, but it needs one. It can't sit around forever without references. J 00:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You should bring that up in the appropriate place, which isn't here, or on my talk page. Maybe you can convince the consensus that you're correct about this. Good luck if that's what you choose to do. Rray 00:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Nominator didn't provide a valid reason for deletion. Lack of citations is a reason for an unreferenced tag, not an AfD. (Reviewing the valid reasons for deletion might be helpful in the future.) Rray 00:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Assume good faith, please. I don't appreciate your venomous words. J 00:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Venomous words"? I don't see anything venomous in my comments. Sorry you feel that way though. Rray 00:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep These kind of articles provide valuable information, especially the type of people a university graduates. I find it interesting you chose the McGill article to put up for AfD&mdash;I hope you don't have anything against McGill, as not many "Lists of people by university" articles have had references. I also hope this is not a case of trolling.  Blue  Ag09 (Talk) 04:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * WOW. So it's okay to add the tag to the Ryerson University article but not the same tag to the McGill University article? See this revision.  Blue  Ag09  (Talk) 07:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * See WP:WAX and WP:AGF. I started here because of the constant additions of unsourced items. Gotta start somewhere. J 11:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * See WP:NOEFFORT. I'm still waiting for a valid reason to delete this article.  Blue  Ag09 (Talk) 04:08, 17 November 2007 (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.