Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of famous Scorpios


 * 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.  Singu larity  01:39, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

List of famous Scorpios

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Should be easy delete. A new list of poeple that are Scorpios... I believe similar categories/lists were deleted in the past. Renata 16:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC) Adendum: found the category discussion. See here for snowballing delete. Can't find discussions on lists, but I am positive it came up somewhere before. Renata 17:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT - the criterion for inclusion is subjective (who decides who is 'famous'?). I was just considering nominating this myself, but Renata beat me to it ;) EyeSereneTALK 16:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: The "not a directory" argument has merit. Supporting keeping the list, however, would be Wiki is not paper.  That said, I am not expressing any opinion vis-à-vis those two arguments, but rather point out that if it is deleted, there is a section in the Scorpio article for such people here.  Since that section is small (and so long as it stays such), my opinion is thus merge and redirect to that section.  Baccyak4H (Yak!) 17:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete List of loosely associated items. WP is not paper is not really a valid argument, because it can always be countered with the equally vague statement - "WP is not a collection of indiscriminate information".    Grouping people based on their astrological signs is an extremely loose inclusion criteria Corpx 17:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- categorizing people by their astrological sign is a very loose criterion. Heck, I could put myself on List of famous Pisceans if I wanted... Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?) 19:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral Personally I think that grouping people this way is stupid. but many people do so classify themselves and others think it important. It's hardly a loose criterion for anyone whose birthday is known. DGG (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT and WP:NOT. A list that encompasses approximately 1/12 of the human race based on a coincidence of birth date is an indiscriminate directory. Otto4711 21:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. This is even too big to be a category. Nen  yedi  • (Deeds•Talk) 21:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can see why this list was created - looks like someone forked it out of Scorpio (astrology) in an attempt to clean that article up.  Nevertheless, categorizing people by some arbitrary time period isn't really necessary, either.  ɑʀкʏɑɴ 22:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The list is incomplete and non maintainable and better suited for a category.--JForget 01:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wow, a list of people born between October 21 and November 20, or something like that. This could have at least included some bullshit about how "Scorpios" are more like than 11/12ths of the population to be decisive leaders or benevolent artists.  Mandsford 04:01, 18 August 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.