Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of newspapers in Germany


 * 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 Keep per WP:SNOW – PeaceNT 12:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

List of newspapers in Germany

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

It's simply a list of newspapers, with no information about them at all. Umalee 17:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep There are lists for most countries ... As far as I can tell, it's a list of an encyclopedic nature. If you think you can make it better, with more info, you should edit it, rather than nominate it for deletion. Leebo 86 17:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't see any reason why this one should be singled out among the dozens of other lists (as cited by Leebo86), unless the nominator is creating a test case. This list is just as encyclopedic as any of the others. And it does provide information - the circulation. Anything else can be handled by the articles on the different papers, and I don't see that many redlinks. 23skidoo 19:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, reasonably organized and scoped. Lists have advantages over categories, including redlinks, annotations, and so forth. --Dhartung | Talk 22:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A perfectly valid list like all the others, no reason to single out Germany. Keep. --Hurax 09:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Lists usualy leave most of the information of an individual subject in its own article. Because the list doesm't work as a full article is no reason to delete it. User:Dimadick
 * Keep - I find encyclopedic. It is also useful to find the relevant article, especially for foreign language (frequent type and mind error), advantages from categories as Dhartung, with an addition: change of newspaper name can not be shown in categories. --Cate |Talk 14:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per norm. Killroy4 14:19, 26 January 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.