Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who were who were non adherents of the Dharmic religions to be cremated


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 20:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

List of people who were who were non adherents of the Dharmic religions to be cremated
Do we need a list of people who were who were non adherents of the Dharmic religions to be cremated? Yeah, let's have it cremated. —Home Row Keysplurge 13:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * On a more serious note: This is just one of those completely useless lists that keep growing and growing as more stuff is added by IPs. I don't see how it belongs in an encyclopaedia. —Home Row Keysplurge 13:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete utterly useless lift cruft --Bachrach44 13:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Totally pointless listcruft. Over the last few decades, cremation has become pretty routine in Western (sorry, "non-Dharmic") cultures. Fan1967 13:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This seems to have the capacity to grow alarmingly without adding any value that I can see.  If value can be asserted, I'd be prepared to reconsider my vote, although I don't expect this to occur.  Obviously some work has gone into this, but I can't see why this should be in an encyclopedia.  Please convince me otherwise. Colon el  Tom 13:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as listcruft. Robin Johnson 14:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yet another list based on arbirtrary criteria with no encyclopedic value.--Isotope23 15:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Cremation is certainly one way to stop them adhering to anything. And what's with the 'who were who were' - some sort of fork from List of people who were non-adherents of the Dharmic religions to be cremated?    Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  15:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless lists with illegible titles make 23skidoo cry. 23skidoo 22:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete nonsense, listcruft. I'd suggest a space burial to get it out of Wikipedia forever, but that costs too much and should be reserved for people who meet WP:BIO. M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons mentioned above. DVD+ R/W 00:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Cremate, ahem, delete for reasons self-evident. Danny Lilithborne 06:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * delete and possibly WP:DAFT. Grutness...wha?  07:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. The current article name is whacky (until recently it was simply List of people who were cremated), however the content is factual and informative. Exactly the sort of data I'd exapect to find in Wikipedia. --Gene_poole 06:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep and move back to List of people who were cremated. The information IS useful, but the current name of the page is just way too long and sort of silly. I have a feeling this page was moved on a whim, and now people are "voting" on this article due to its name alone.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  21:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Even so, I doubt very much the list can ever be exhaustive - it's not quite List of dead people, but it's close. Robin Johnson
 * Blimey, I was expecting that to be a redlink! Robin Johnson 22:36, 30 April 2006 (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.