Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of New York Giants players


 * 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  k eep. - Mailer Diablo 10:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

List of New York Giants players

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Argument for delete was that the category New York Giants players makes this article unnecessary. Argument for keep was that the article includes red links, so that Giants fans could know which players still need articles. Also, the list is more complete than the category because of the same reason (the list includes players without an article as well). For now, this is a procedural nom, so no vote. → Ed Gl  13:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Such a list is very useful, bordering on invaluable, for people writing new articles on Wikipedia as it shows which players have been given an article and who needs doing in the most concise possible way.  I recently did articles on a county's cricketers from a very similar list, something I never would have done if the list hadn't existed.  I would suggest that only people who don't actually contribute new articles to Wikipedia would question the need for such lists. Nick mallory 13:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, lists are not the same thing as categories. Would you propose deleting all lists?  Corvus cornix 22:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * To whom is this question directed? I stated this was a procedural nomination. → Ed Gl  23:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I meant a generic "you". :)  Corvus cornix 18:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I gotcha. I was a little confused since nobody's voted delete yet :] → Ed Gl  19:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - as per others; also seems to meet the other two of the list guidelines criteria List_guideline. --Remi 22:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep some people do not like lists. I can understand the feeling--with the typical mix of black and red links they look a little messy and unfinished. But WP is unfinished--they are many articles on notable subjects still to be rewritten. Since we accept all major league football players as N, we need articles on all of them, but do not yet have them. This is the starting point, which leads naturally to stubs and then to full articles. It has taken several years for WP to get as far as it has, and it will take quite a few years more before it can catch up with all the notable things and people before the 21st century. DGG 02:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep unornamented lists are equivilent to stubs - WP:LIST enumerates the features of lists, if needed. WilyD 21:01, 30 April 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.