Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turkish 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 (non-admin closure), WP:SNOWBALL closure on my own nomination. I disagree with having these sorts of articles, but if this is Wikipedia policy to keep, it should of course stay regardless of my opinion. - Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 08:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Turkish people

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

Listcruft and completely superfluous to having a category. Besides, there already are articles such as List of Turks by net worth, List of Turkish diplomats etc. - Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 13:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:CLN. Article has been around since Feb 2004 and is actively maintained.  Gtstricky Talk or C 14:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I am puzzled. Most nations have lists of notable members.  why not the Rturks?  Thomas Babbington (talk) 14:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Thomas Babbington
 * exactly me too think the same . so iv voted keep since i feel it becomes necessary for such a list .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 15:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * keep i think this list is needed at least as a category or something else . but sure this collection will do a lot good for users . me too watching this page so u may comment here . since im bit interested about this article due to its mass collection sure will take part in this debate any where be it here or in the articles discussion page .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 15:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep for now. There are national sub-categories for people by career, so I think most of the entries on this list can be merged into such categories.&mdash;RJH (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, I guess... "List of Turkish people" sounds kind of odd (sort of like a list of all Turkish people, which would be silly), so I'd suggest renaming it to something more similar to corresponding lists for other nationalities -- something like "List of Notable Turks", perhaps. Klausness (talk) 20:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * yup changing the tittle would work, this title (List of Turkish people) isn't that good for this article or any .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 20:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Notability is implied with entrance to the list. Thus, there is no need to say 'list of notable people', as all people on the list should all already be notable.  That's how it works on List of British people, List of Americans, List of Chinese people, etc. Celarnor Talk to me  23:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm not that fond of those titles, either. But I'm OK with leaving this title as it is, too, if other people aren't bothered by it... Klausness (talk) 00:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I don't understand your problem with it. "List of Notable Turkish People" is redundant.  All of the people in it are notable (or they shouldn't be in there).  They are notable by default; non-notable entries to these lists are an exception, not the regular; thus, they aren't required. Celarnor Talk to me  01:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * well then im backing up my change . its the same as earlier .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 04:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. Categories do not replace lists.  The others you list include another layer of speciality, such as net worth.  This one contains only the requirement of 'turkish'.  Removing it would put a hole in our navigation system.  There's really no reason to delete this. Celarnor Talk to me  23:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Move, to "List of Notable Turks". The idea implied by the title of having a list of all Turks is risible! Tim Vickers (talk) 03:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not necessary ... inclusion in any of the "List of people from whatever country" lists ALREADY REQUIRES notability to be established on that. We only include notable things by default; doing what you propose would be pointless, as that is already what this list, and every other list like it, is.  Notability is already required for inclusion, just like anywhere else on wikipedia.  What you propose would require us to go through every single article, every single list, and change it to Metallica (Notable band), Stephen King (Notable Writer), List of notable Americans, List of notable British people, List of notable politicians, List of notable Cubans, etc.  That's a slippery slope that introduces unnecessary ugliness and redundancy to Wikipedia, which should be avoided when possible. Celarnor Talk to me  03:13, 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.