Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of Czechoslovakia


 * 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. ✗ plicit  23:49, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

List of people on the postage stamps of Czechoslovakia

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

Still completely unsourced and un-maintained. Still no proof that this is a notable topic per WP:SALAT. Prod contested with a WP:SOFIXIT rationale, but again, there's no proof that this can be fixed. Ping and  Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Czech Republic,  and Slovakia. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This is something for another kind of project, outside of Wikipedia. BD2412  T 21:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete This article has existed since 14 March 2003. That was about when Wikipedia has 100,000 articles. It has lasted over 19 years. Yet it has no sources. It is a list with links, but no explanation of who these people are, so we cannot easily be sure the right people are linked, and the number of redlinks makes you wonder how many more were redlinks when first linked and thus gives no confidence anyone has ever reviewed these links for accuracy. Even if they did, with no sources, how would they know how to evaluate accuracy. This list is of a subject that has not changed in over 19 years, yet it still may only be right through 1969 (although how do we know even that with no sources). An article like this should not possibly be outdated, when there was no possible change since before it was created, yet somehow it is. Which is a sign this is a trivial subject that having an article on is not justified.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:51, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment If we do want to keep these lists in any form in any location, we should reorder them to list by year, not alphabetically. If there is any encyclopedic value to such a listing, it is to show the changes over time in decisions on who to portray in stamps.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep; all available evidence tell us that these people were depicted on stamps because they are important to the history and society of their country. Thus, these lists are more reliable and useful to an encyclopedia than List of Czech women writers and other totally unsourced lists that are all over wp. Bw --Orland (talk) 21:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Other stuff exists is not a good argument to keep an article at hand. I do not think we should have an unsourced list of Czech women writers, but at least we will agree that being a writer is a notable trait for most people (and if their writing was not defining, they should not be on the list). Also that list is limited to those who we have articles for, these people on stamp lists are not (some of them come close to having half their entrires lacking articles).John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete because "People on the postage stamps of Czechoslovakia" does not appear to meet WP:NLIST (at least, can't find any evidence of this); and additionally because this would be a WP:BADIDEA as Wikipedia is not a philatelical catalogue and there is no indication how this kind of page is of any broader encyclopedic significance. An encyclopedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, even if is true, and despite it possibly being interesting to a limited number of dedicated enthusiasts. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:16, 1 June 2022 (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.