Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional serial killers


 * 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 no consensus to delete, default to keep. Sandstein 06:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

List of fictional serial killers

 * — (View AfD)

I am completing an incomplete nomination. Abstain Iamunknown 19:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, a common theme in literature and art. This list contains notable examples. Tarinth 21:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A ludicrously common in theme in literature -- well, fiction -- and art, and thus pretty indiscriminate and unmaintainable. And Lord Voldemort? --Calton | Talk 15:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as nominator - originally part of mass nom at Articles for deletion/List of fictional actors. These are indiscriminate lists drawing largely unrelated articles from a wide variety of genres, difficult if not impossible to maintain and will never aproach completeness. Otto4711 23:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy close. This is a relisting and lacks an explanation for deletion. Keep as per extensive discussion at Articles for deletion/List of fictional actors. -- User:Docu
 * The only reason this is a "relisting" is because someone took it upon him/herself to break up an existing nomination. It is disingenuous in the extreme to suggest closure on that basis and quite frankly your cherry-picking the listings you want speedily closed does not speak well of your motivation. The reason for the nomination is right there in my comments as nominator and stating that there is no explanation is just flat out not true. As for the discussion at the previous nom, a number of those voicing opinions called for keep/close only because of the mass nature of the nomination. It's ridiculous to claim that those procedural !votes constitute consensus on every article individually. Otto4711 05:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It may not be a relisting. See this subpage for an explanation &mdash; Iamunknown 05:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy close without prejudice. Nominator gives no rationale for this proposal. —Psychonaut 12:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. Just deal with it. Or did you have an ACTUAL rationale? --Calton | Talk 15:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The nom does give a rationale; see Otto's first post &mdash; Iamunknown 05:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Good list: nothing indescriminate or unmaintainable about it. AndyJones 13:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. There's this thing called "Categories" which would be more useful for large, disorganized, and indiscriminate lists like this. --Calton | Talk 15:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A category doesn't do what this list does, which is provide helpful annotation (which is a key factor for WP:LIST). Tarinth 15:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Convert to category, that's what categories are for. A conversion is no loss of information.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  16:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have rebutted this 96% inaccurate observation here. AndyJones 12:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - it is a loss of information, because you lose annotation. According to WP:LIST, a good list provides organization (this one does), annotation (this one does) and needs to be useful (this one is). Tarinth 17:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as we have kept list of fictional prime ministers, we should keep this. Equally appropriate. DGG 03:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Valuable list; contains considerably more information than the equivalent category. --David Edgar 17:34, 10 January 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.