Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of educators (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Shereth 18:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

List of educators
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

unmaintainable list —Ruud 18:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —John Z (talk) 19:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with the nominator's rationale; this is far too long to fit into the list format. It works much better in the parallel system of categories and subcategories (or in lists of academics associated with individual institutions). —David Eppstein (talk) 22:10, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. per nom. Alos, the critera of "educator" is overly vague. An educator is someone who teaches something to people as a job. Kindergarten teachers are educators. One could argue a Sunday school teacher is an educator. A driving instructor is an educator. A karate teacher is an educator. Do these people all make the list? Niteshift36 (talk) 04:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes they do provided they are notable, but few are. The list seems of little use. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC).
 * Ah, but this list doesn't specify notable educators, does it? And judging by the redlinks, notability doesn't have to be established to be included. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Niteshift36. Thryduulf (talk) 21:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Better done in sections. Incidentally, the list does certainly imply notable eductors, as does every such list. The criterion always is having articles in Wikipedia  DGG (talk) 04:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, judging by the red links, that may not be the authors intent. How many times to we merge and redirect things because they aren't notable enough for their own article....yet there they are in another article or list. Niteshift36 (talk) 06:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and DGG. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 10:28, 11 July 2009 (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.