Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of first names

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was deleted.

A very poor article with thousands of names missing, poor structure, few articles created for the links and no etymologies. Existing articles which cover names include: List of Biblical names, Most popular names and Wiktionary:Wiktionary Appendix:First names – these cover the topic well enough, I think.violet/riga (t)


 * Delete I can't see how this list has any value to anyone. --Marco 09:30, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * point all paegs that link there to wiktionary and delete. Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 09:33, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful list. Honestly, it's the listing of articles like this that give VFD a bad name. Ambi 09:41, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * It's a pathetic list and covers less than 1% of first names (plus the other reasons stated above). violet/riga (t) 09:44, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I have a list of first names which covers 90% of all US citizens. I could merge this in if people want. anthony (see warning) 15:05, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * A gigantic list like that is hardly encyclopedia material. I'd elect to have it incorporated into the Wiktionary by a bot.  --Ardonik.talk 04:49, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why this list isn't encyclopedia material but List of people by name is. Or do you think we should delete that list too? We need lists to help organize the encyclopedia.  I have long believed that they should be part of a separate namespace, and one day categories will be good enough to replace them completely, but until then we need to put lists under a lower standard here on VfD. anthony (see warning) 18:35, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * If the links were merely to existing articles (which themselves are of a decent quality) then that might be ok, but seeing as it is for all kinds of names (and doesn't do that job very well at all) it really isn't very good. As said, it misses thousands of names. violet/riga (t) 19:10, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep it in its previous version actually grouping "First names often encountered in nobility and famous figures". Further it should point to more specific lists, e.g List of Biblical names, Most popular names, Namesdays in Sweden, List of Dutch first names. -- User:Docu
 * Keep. Isn't this already listed here? anthony (see warning) 15:04, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, definitely, though it could do with a bit of work. Also needs links to other refined lists as Docu points out above. -- Graham  &#9786; | Talk 16:17, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep only as a "table of contents" for wikipedia. In all other respects a more comprehensive project, Wiktionary:Wiktionary_Appendix:First_names is there for you. Mikkalai 17:46, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * In this relation I'd also like to point at a miserable List of people by first name. See Talk:List of people by first name about the proposed usage of the List of first names. Mikkalai 18:17, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, but rename to list of popular first names or something similar. -Sean Curtin 19:02, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * They are far from being popular (xena popular?). They are just names happen to be used by notable people. Mikkalai 19:42, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to the Wiktionary first name appendix provided by Mikkalai (thanks, interesting link!) and delete from here. I see no need for a list of soft links, though I understand that others might disagree.  Honestly, who types in "John" in the search box just to browse the names of all famous people having that first name?  If they instead want to know the word's meaning, that's what the Wiktionary is for.  --Ardonik.talk 02:43, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've typed in "Arnold" twice this week looking for the page of Arnold Schwartzewhatever. anthony (see warning) 03:28, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * For the same purpose, I would have put a bookmark on my user page, but I see your point. --Ardonik.talk 04:47, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd have to find the page before I could bookmark it. Yes, I could have done a full text search, but this would have been more painful.  Perhaps this is a special case, though.  Schwartzewhatever is "Often known as simply 'Arnold,'" after all. I just thought it was ironic that I had just done essentially what you suggested no one would ever do. anthony (see warning) 18:42, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Admins - if this stays, please list on cleanup page (Re: "boy"/"girl") Davodd 07:29, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, what's wrong with "boy"/"girl"?? How else can classifying first names as boy/girl be done?? 66.32.240.129 13:12, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * male/female--Samuel J. Howard 19:25, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a baby name list (much less a list of every name ever used) - T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  23:43, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not encyclopedic. Improv 18:30, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep but unlink the names, few of the pages contain any actual discussion of the name. - SimonP 18:43, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.