Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of love stories


 * 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. Killiondude (talk) 05:08, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

List of love stories

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Too vague, subjective and indiscriminate a criterion. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:10, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 22:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 22:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong delete. WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. Many of these list entries aren't even notable stories but subplots in other fictional works. Ajf773 (talk) 00:00, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems like WP:OR.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:47, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete too indiscriminate: almost anything has some form of love story to a varying degree. -- ☾Loriendrew☽  ☏(ring-ring)  01:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete The article has no real criteria as to what qualifies as a "love story" (like most of the listed examples are just subplots and are not the main focus of the story) and the list is way too indiscriminate anyways. 98.209.191.37 (talk) 15:20, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * IP editors cannot !vote at AfD. Please either get a user account and sign this post with it, or unbold your comment. James500 (talk) 15:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course IPs are allowed to vote at AfD. Don't be an idiot. Reyk YO! 17:04, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I was sure we had a guideline against this because IP addresses change all the time because they are constantly reassigned but I have struck my comment as I suppose I could have misremembered. I apologise if I was mistaken. James500 (talk) 18:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * A list like this is not indiscriminate if it is referenced properly. If an independent reliable source calls a story a love story, if it says "this story is a love story", then we have a perfectly valid grounds for including that story in a list like this. There was a lengthy community discussion about these sort of lists a while ago about lists like this, occasioned by the list of weird buildings, and there was strong consensus that a list like this was perfectly valid, provided that there was a reliable source that confirmed in express and unambiguous words that the entry belonged in the list. I think the discussion took place at the village pump, but I am not certain. I am speaking for site consensus here. James500 (talk) 15:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete- As pointed out by Ajf773, many of these are not love stories specifically, others are not fictional. This is too vague and indiscriminate to be workable. Reyk YO! 17:36, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: In theory, a notable list, narrowly tailored, could be created. Can it be saved? Bearian (talk) 01:19, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Reply. Difficult. I suppose you could make a list of legendary lovers, e.g. Romeo and Juliet, Robin and Marian, Adam and Eve, Tristan and Isolde/Iseult, Lancelot and Guinevere, Narcissus ... and himself? But there are way too many from real life (and everyday fiction), so where do you draw the line? I mean, you have all of recorded history to work with. Elizabeth and Robert Browning, no problem, Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton seems okay, as does Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. But what about Celine Dion and René Angélil? Ronald and Nancy Reagan? Or in my neck of the woods, Pierre and Margaret Trudeau? Clarityfiend (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2018 (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.