Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of endorsements for Joe Lieberman in the 2006 Connecticut Senate race


 * 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. JForget 00:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

List of endorsements for Joe Lieberman in the 2006 Connecticut Senate race

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

This list was originally split off into its own article back in August 2006 when the list of endorsements was apparently unmanageably large in the main article, and editors could not agree on how to deal with the problem. Three years later, it seems pretty clear that this article ought to be deleted, as it violates WP:LC. Specifically: "The list was created just for the sake of having such a list," "the list is of interest to a very limited number of people," "the list is a violation of Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information," and "the list is unencyclopaedic, i.e. it would not be expected to be included in an encyclopaedia." Since the main article no longer has the problems it had in 2006 and this article violates WP:LC, the deletion of this list article seems appropriate. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 21:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- ( X!  ·  talk )  · @944  · 21:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- ( X!  ·  talk )  · @945  · 21:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- ( X!  ·  talk )  · @947  · 21:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Delete largely per nom, adding the point that the article on the Senate race has a similar list. If there is some information we need to transfer from here to there I'd be okay with a merge, but I'm not sure that's necessary. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 21:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Delete (merge if required) per nom and Bigtimepeace -Miskaton (talk) 22:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't really think it is. (see below) A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete (merge if required) per above; redundant list and article. Bearian (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This sort of list as a stand alone is not a good idea. DGG (talk) 05:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Redundant. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, assuming everything of any relevance has been merged (or is already included) at United States Senate election in Connecticut, 2006. Have we checked to make sure this is the case? —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  21:25, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Before I nominated this article for deletion, I merged an article about the Democratic primary in this Senate race into the main article, so yes, I can say with confidence that there is already an appropriately sized list of key endorsements in the main article. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine to me! —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  01:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above discussion. hamiltonstone (talk) 02:07, 31 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.