Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of naturalized citizens of the United States


 * 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. — TKD::Talk 07:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

List of naturalized citizens of the United States
Unnecessary, unmaintainable duplicate of Category:Naturalized citizens of the United States. Circeus 21:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete As long as the entries in the page are listed in Category:Naturalized citizens of the United States. GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 22:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom – Zedla 23:32, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep How the hell did this show up down at the bottom of the list, when it was one of the articles nominated late in the day? The category doesn't impart the information about where the persons were from originally (in other words, all a category will tell you is that Isaac Asimov was a naturalized citizen; the article will tell you he was from Russia), so this one actually is neceesary.  Unmaintainable?  I doubt it.  I think on'es native land remains the same throughout their lifetime.... Mandsford 01:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If the list looks even remotely as "complete" as it should be, I would keep it in an instant, but as is, it serves no purpose that the category (and various other immigrant categories) cannot. Circeus 02:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - with regards to the placement of this nomination on the list, unless Wikipedia has changed the AFD format (and they might have), newer nominations are always supposed to go at the bottom. 23skidoo 14:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete for this lis to be accurate as named, it would have to be prohibitively long, and would have to have hundreds of names added every day.  The category is useful.  The "List" article is not.74.171.5.194 03:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as an adjunct to the category. The cat is difficult to navigate, and the list is annotated with the country of origin. Its no more difficult to maintain than the cat. There is no policy of deleting a list when a category exists, so long as it is sorted differently, and is annotated. The categories are not annotated. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 06:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - better handled by a category, otherwise as a list it could potentially have millions of entries. Utterly unmaintainable, and also WP:NOR violating unless a source is provided for every single name given. My advice: don't go there, at least not in this venue. 23skidoo 14:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Better as a category, there are possibly thousands of people with articles who could be listed here, so this is indiscriminate information. Crazysuit 02:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The list does provide more info at a glance than the category does, but it conceals as much as it reveals. Its purpose is unclear. Any list that jumbles Albert Einstein together with Pierce Brosnan has a decided lack of focus. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 02:41, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Categorization makes more sense for a group as large as this. Zaxem 02:15, 16 September 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.