Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of living life peers


 * 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. Feel free to create a redirect if desired.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 22:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

List of living life peers

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Redundant with List of members of the House of Lords (since this is a subset of that). This information could all be nicely included there (if in the form of individual footnotes or something). Is thus a content-fork and also fails WP:LISTN. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:39, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not an almanac nor a collection of trivia. pburka (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:5 says explicitly that "Wikipedia combines many features of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers". Andrew🐉(talk) 18:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair point. I still believe this type of list is inappropriate in the spirit of WP:NOTTEMPORARY. If life peerages were abolished the list would slowly evaporate away into nothing. pburka (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep/merge The worst case would be merger to List_of_members_of_the_House_of_Lords per WP:REDUNDANTFORK.  Deletion is not appropriate per WP:PRESERVE as there may be good reasons to break this out and there's no reason to suppress it. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * There are no good reasons to break out a subset of a list when that other list already includes all of the encyclopedically relevant information (there's nothing to merge to it; the 'Lords Temporal' section already identifies which members are life peers, which are hereditary peers, ...; and under which Act of Parliament they were created, while not particularly relevant, is obvious from that too, since the Life Peerages Act 1958 covers everything except the law life peers, which are identified as such). Since there's nothing to merge, "List of living life peers" becomes an unhelpful redirect (WP:PANDORA), misleading users into thinking there will be other lists of "living [x]"... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of members of the House of Lords -GorgonaJS (talk) 00:46, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Curbon7 (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Living life peers are already listed on List of barons in the peerages of Britain and Ireland.67.173.23.66 (talk) 23:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:HTRIVIA-- rsjaffe 🗩 🖉 23:15, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge/Redirect to List of members of the House of Lords.4meter4 (talk) 03:49, 15 September 2021 (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.