Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of non-fiction books about Shanghai 1920s–1950


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 13:10, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

List of non-fiction books about Shanghai 1920s–1950

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Unreferenced orphan since 2013. Unsourced lists are not useful. Dicklyon (talk) 06:51, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Even if sourced, overly specific and almost certainly non-encyclopedic cross-categorization. Jclemens (talk) 07:29, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Mostly redlinks, list equivalent of WP:NARROWCAT. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 07:41, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete All red links and one link to the city not a book by the name of the city. The two films mentioned are apparently porn.  We have plenty of "list of books about"  various things, but those list have plenty of blue links and thus serve a purpose.   D r e a m Focus  11:53, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SALAT, specifically too specific. (Why is a non-fiction list included in a fictional elements discussion?) Clarityfiend (talk) 11:58, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:51, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. Somehow I find this useful from the library science perspective, but I do wonder if it meets NLIST or such. It has a relatively narrow scope. But OR is a concern. On the fence. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:53, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - from a librarian perspective, this would be useful, as there isn't a collection of books covering this specific topic anywhere else, and library catalogues don't go to this level of detail. I know that's not enough to necessarily negate our usual AFD wiki rules, but thought I would toss the comment here to see what people think. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:30, 20 December 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.