Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of occult authors

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep.

List of occult authors
I can't see any value in starting a list like this, when the same result could be accomplished with the "Category" facility. Deb 10:59, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC) Keep. Categories suck. How do you create red links in categories to show potential articles? Nelson Ricardo 01:38, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that's an argument for deletion. Please correct me if I'm wrong.  The list has potential to become encyclopedic.  Abstain for now .Keep. --Viriditas  | Talk 22:18, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. surely not fundamentally different to list of mystery writers or list of science fiction authors? Icundell 13:01, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, I'm not convinced as to the usefulness of theselists either, since we have categories. However, I see no reason to delete this if we are keeping other lists which are similar. Rje 14:39, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep lists have different uses to categories, for example they can include red links to needed articles, disambiguation information, and complete 'substub' coverage of item which don't need their own page. Kappa 16:44, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree with any of the above points, but we started making lists before we had categories, and the authors in this list almost all have their own articles already. Surely this is just duplication -- we should keep lists for things that can't be included in categories, eg. song titles, which generally don't have their own articles. Deb 20:12, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I found the two cites above via the categories - but both are useful in different ways. Unil WP has a halfway decent search engine, both are needed Icundell 21:13, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, lists like this are ok so long as they're not along the lines of Sussex 6th formers with AB blood types. Wyss 22:09, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, one of the few lists that actually should be kept on wikipedia. Megan1967 23:12, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep; we haven't made a community decision yet to move to using categories instead of lists; such a decision is not one to be made here, but in the wider community. James F. (talk) 02:25, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep as lists have inherent advantages over categories. When the tide turns we can revisit this and other lists.  GRider\talk 17:53, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I believe categories to be better than lists as there has to be a pre-existing article before it even gets included in a category. Lists can act as a portal to abuse of mass listing and encourages non-notable and trivial articles to be created. Megan1967 00:25, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. No community consensus. --JuntungWu 07:16, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.