Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people from The Bronx


 * 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. -Splash - tk 19:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

List of people from The Bronx

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This started out as a section of The Bronx and got broken out into a distinct list article. After some poking at it, I've come to the conclusion that it would do better if it was deleted and replaced by Category:People from the Bronx -- RoySmith (talk) 01:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Categorize per nom. --Blanchardb 01:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Categorify, but please make it "...the Bronx", not "...The Bronx", thanks. SolidPlaid 01:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The category already exists. The nom misspelled the word "category," which I've corrected to make the link. Otto4711 03:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Do-oh. Thanks for pointing that out :-)  -- RoySmith (talk) 14:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep This is exactly what lists are for, as described at WP:LIST, the official guideline on the subject. Categories and lists are not intended as an either/or alternative, but are meant to be used to complement each other. If there is truly an issue with this as a standalone list, then let's put it back into The Bronx article from whence it came. Alansohn 14:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep the way to handle the category vs list debate is to have both, as long as someone is willing to maintain themDGG (talk) 22:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * What is the added value of having both vs. just having the cat? The fact that the cat has 200 entries and the list only 120 or so says to me that nobody is willing to maintain them both. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * PS -- see Don't repeat yourself for why having this information in two places is a bad idea. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Repeating oneself when the question has already been answered is, indeed, a waste of time. It might help to read Categories, lists, and series boxes, the official Wikipedia guideline on the list "vs." category issue, which states "These methods should not be considered to be in competition with each other. Rather, they are synergistic, each one complementing the other. For example, since editors differ in style, some favor building lists while others favor building categories, allowing links to be gathered in two different ways, with lists often leapfrogging categories, and vice versa. One should not be deleted in favor of the other. Instead, each should be used to update the other." After some poking at Wikipedia policy, I've come to the conclusion that this AfD doesn't have a leg to stand on. Alansohn 23:18, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've read it. None of the items (with the possible exception of including red links) under Advantages of lists really apply here.  If this list included some added value, it would make sense.  There's no additional information.  There's no images.  There's no different ways of sorting the items.  There's no links to specific sections of articles.  This is just a list of names presented in alphabetical order, whcih is exactly the same information which is presented by the cat.  -- RoySmith (talk) 00:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I heartily disagree with your interpretation, which is unsupported by Wikipedia policy, but you may want to re-read the article, which addresses your issues. Alansohn 05:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Now it's an article worth keeping. You've given it the added value which it was missing before.  Thank you.  -- RoySmith (talk) 06:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - the cat does nicely, thanks. – Mike . lifeguard  &#124; @en.wb 03:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and also categorize per DGG. "Imposing standards aimed at strict adherence to DRY could stifle community involvement in contexts where it is highly valued, such as a wiki." -- Don't repeat yourself. I'm from the Bronx, myself, and I'll maintain this one, if it is kept. :-) 20:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearian (talk • contribs)


 * 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.