Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most famous people according to Google


 * 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 of the debate was DELETE. Owen&times; &#9742;  17:03, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

List of most famous people according to Google
Original Research, Listcruft, Non-encyclopedic, Useless article. Delete VileRage ( Talk | Cont ) 03:24, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Edwardian 03:30, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Appears identical to List of Most Famous People, nominated about 10 entries before this one. Turnstep 03:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, for the record. Turnstep 03:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Thanks to the nom &mdash; I should have done this myself after my whining on the other AfD (List of Most Famous People). In any case, this doesn't belong for the same reasons that one doesn't either. Jacqui ★ 04:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just 'cuz I suggested renaming the article, doesn't mean there needs to be one. ;-) 23skidoo 04:28, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above vote. It is original research unless someone else outside Wikipedia does the research. Capitalistroadster 05:03, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete listcruft, Googlecruft, almost cruftcruft heh. POV. NSLE  ( 讨论 + extra ) 05:59, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I tried my hand at adding some names to this one, and I say Delete. It's really more of a "list of living people whose names are mentioned on the largest number of web pages according to Google," and it's hopelessly skewed towards recent US politics, people who go by one name, and people whose names are easy to spell.  Also, as webpages are created and destroyed at an alarming rate, it is perpetually out of date.  The list is kind of interesting, but neither useful nor encyclopedic. - AdelaMae 06:03, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above and nom. Shanes 06:59, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per AdelaMae and my comments on the related nomination. - Mgm|(talk) 10:49, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * violates all three of our official content policies. This violates two out of three.  The article can never be verifiable, since the very source that it is using is directly affected by Wikipedia itself, and one of the fundamental principles of verifiability is that Wikipedia is not its own source.  The source is also a perpetually moving target.  The article is clearly original research, since it is propounding an novel definition of what it is to be a "most famous person". Delete. Uncle G 14:28, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Useless listcruft. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 14:49, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete If anything it should just be the list of famous people. google shouldn't have anything to do with it.--Ewok Slayer 16:30, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete data too ephemeral, next year the list will be completely different. --TimPope 21:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete data too ephemeral, next moment the list will be completely different. -- utcursch | talk 08:24, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Izehar 16:39, 27 November 2005 (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.