Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of authors by age at publication of breakthrough work


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 20:57, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

List of authors by age at publication of breakthrough work

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Unencyclopaedic, arbitrary list, which authors, why? for starters. Incoherent, I don't read his stuff but I thought everybody knew Stieg Larsson was dead when his books were published. Doesn't seem to satisfy any of the criteria at List and finally because it appears to be the article creator's whim and nothing more ("created page, because I wanted there to be a list like this").  Captain Screebo Parley! 12:16, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete This list will inherently be OR and synthesis due to "breakthrough" being a subjective term. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 12:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - What is the criteria for determining exactly what 'breakthrough work' is? First work published, first work well reviewed, first work to receive some sort of award?  This has to be defined clearly for the list to have any value.-- Stv  Fett erly  (Edits)  13:26, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Arbitrary criteria for inclusion of authors, works. Neutralitytalk 16:08, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Actually interesting, but an encyclopedia is for basic facts -- not interesting ways of putting them together. Borock (talk) 17:10, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Which authors? What constitutes a 'breakout work"? Why age? Perhaps an interesting trivia topic, but inherently unencyclopedic. Carrite (talk) 18:26, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Prophesying the end of the article by some future inundation of entries is a Slippery slope argument; a logical fallacy. It is not impossible to stop or even turn back, let alone determine the standard of, inclusion of list articles. Anarchangel (talk) 23:08, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete- Without a coherent definition of "breakthrough" work, this list can only ever be personal opinions and original research. Reyk  YO!  20:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment- I'm the page creator. Thanks for the thoughtful reactions. Captain Screebo describes my goals exactly: I wanted to find a list on this and didn't find it, so I made it. I don't think there's a strong case against the value of this information compared to other lists on the site (though of course I'm biased), but as many people have said, the "breakthrough" standard is hopelessly arbitrary. If we could come up with a more objective standard--first work to be purchased more than X times? bestselling work?--would it rise to encyclopaedic standards? As for the selection of authors, most of it is lifted from List of bestselling books. Andersem (talk) 06:13, 14 May 2012 (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.