Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of famous women in history


 * 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. OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

List of famous women in history
Completing a nomination. Rationale was given as edit summary: "Nominated for deletion. Absurdly general, very presence of article (segregated from other Famous Figures in History) gives credence to male chauvanism." No !vote from me. (Liberatore, 2006). 15:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - either unmaintainable or non-neutral point of view. Yomangani talk 16:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Criteria for inclusion far too vague and subjective and is extremely broad. Agent 86 21:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This would draw out many POV issues. Famous can mean different things for different people. -- Nish kid 64 23:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete List definition is too broad - would contain an unmanageable amount of entries Bwithh 00:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too broad a criteria. Could have thousands of names -- and what does "famous" mean, really... 23skidoo 13:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not delete. Please leave it--debate criteria if you will, but it's a very useful resource for educators. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.141.76 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete for POV violation and being excessively broad with vague criteria. Wryspy 19:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. I nominated this. Once more, segregating women from the "list of significant figures in history" is misogynistic. The inference the reader might take from this list is that the figures included here would not be significant if they weren't also women. And is there honestly room for every single female celebrity ever? - Maggie --64.229.184.47 21:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete. Neither the number of entries, not the size of the table of contents seems too long to me. I would suggest 2000 entries and 200 categories, respectively, as a criterion for "unmanageble". Then we could discuss some other method of acheiving the pedantic goal of finding counterexamples for stereotypes. Also, the number of "broad" puns in this poll seem at least sufficient already. Can we continue with "figures" for a while? --Davidrei 21:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: Too broad. A pity though - it sure was a lot of work. --Gego 08:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Pavel Vozenilek 16:29, 24 September 2006 (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.