Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of historical people portrayed as villains


 * 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 by WP:SNOW as violating WP:NOT and WP:LIST. Bearian 19:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

List of historical people portrayed as villains

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - wildly indiscriminate list, enormous directory of loosely and unassociated items, giant trivia dump. Otto4711 18:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. How exactly the creator planned to keep this remotely up-to-date is anyone's guess.  NA SC AR Fan 24 (radio me!) 18:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and NASCAR Fan24. STORMTRACKER   94  18:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. BASE101 18:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This makes "X in popular culture" articles look relevant and well-cited in comparasion. This article has way too many unsourced "real person X likely inspired fictional character Y" enteries (which is original research), and none of even the more obvious examples can be cited in secondary sources. --Phirazo 19:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Like so many of these lists, impossible to ascertain with any authority who should/should not appear on the list or why someone put them there, nobody can guarantee that a fictional character is "based on" a historical person except the author, fails WP:NOT. Accounting4Taste 19:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Odd article that attempts to list every real person who has been portrayed unfavorably in a "work of fiction" (which apparently covers any film that is not a hard documentary, though some books are thrown in for good measure). Thus, we have tyrants such as Hitler, and hard-to-get-along-with folks like Joan Crawford who are movie antagonists.  It's a list of folks you always knew were "bad guys", and some you didn't.  This one could go on indefinitely.  Mandsford 19:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and SNOW-close it. There is no way to salvage neutrality here. J- ſtan TalkContribs 20:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep or make into a category. Articles like this should be cleaned up, not deleted as these unique lists help to distinguish Wikipedia as that much more expansive of a reference source than say paper encyclopedias.  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 22:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Categories for "villains," "heroes," "antagonists," "protagonists" and the like have been repeatedly deleted at CFD because of the subjective nature of the categorization. That same subjectivity plagues lists of "villains" and the like. Did you have any response at all that actually addresses the points raised in the nomination? Anything? Otto4711 04:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe that Roi is voicing the opinion that something that is "wildly" indiscriminate, or an "enormous" directory or a "giant trivia dump" is not beyond being "cleaned up" as an alternative to deletion. No need to go ballistic.  I think that your nomination will prove successful. Mandsford 23:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Magioladitis 01:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete as implemented, this does seem to be a rather indiscriminate list, and the list of possibilities is so great that I do not see how to readily deal with it. Let it get deleted, and start over in a more focused way--probably as several lists --or -- much better--sourced general articles about historical figures in the cinema, etc. DGG (talk) 08:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, yet another useless trivia dump. Fuck.   Bur nt sau ce  17:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * "Delete" yet another endless unsourced list that will grow out of control.Ridernyc 17:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete just a highly subjective list. Where are the sources? JJL 18:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:LC points 1 through 4, 6 and 8. Stifle (talk) 20:33, 8 October 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.