Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people with cleft chins


 * 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. Sr13 01:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

List of people with cleft chins

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Unreferenced and difficult to source list, possibly original research and of questionable usefulness: It was my own and so far uncontested proposed deletion, but the list has been split off the main article cleft chin, so looking for consensus seems to be more appropriate and productive. Tikiwont 12:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: It is no less referenced than people listed under, for example, List of Holocaust survivors and far more provable. Likewise regarding original research.  It can have uses in genetics, modelling, statistics and much more.  --Interesdom 14:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Although another list was mentioned above, typically WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good enough reason to keep an article around.  However, I just like lists.  Useight 14:50, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. As you imply WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS applies to the above. And this list is just so much bollocks. BTLizard 14:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep although some references are needed. —Pengo 15:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Completely unreferenced and useless list. What is the reason for keeping this? How on earth could this list ever be used? It isn't like having a cleft chin awards you special abilities, it's merely a feature. Why not People with bushy eyebrows or People with brown hair? -- Cyrus      Andiron   23:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, everyone knows that people with cleft chins have superpowers. Seriously though, being unreferenced is not a good reason to delete it. It could fairly easily be referenced, and anyone on the list that can't be referenced probably isnt notable enough to be on it. --Stephanie talk 16:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * My focus was actually on the fact that it was useless. Yes it's unverified, but it also does not have a function that I'm aware of. Why does it matter if someone has a cleft chin? -- Cyrus      Andiron   16:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * How can you possibly say it is useless? I gave examples of three possible uses above and can think of several more without effort.  It may not matter to you whether someone has a cleft chin, just as I don't often care about someone's ethnicity, yet there are streams of lists of various types about Jews, some of which have been challenged by AfD and kept.


 * Delete. It may be verifiable, but is it truly encyclopedic? I truly doubt that. I agree with the above user -- and, as a matter of fact, I fit both of the two categories the above user mentioned. Does that mean I should form Wikipedians with brown hair? Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 16:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with TenPoundHammer's arguments. Additionally, even if relevant, could take a while to cite. RegainTheTruth 16:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC) RegainTheTruth
 * Delete Unreferenced? Go find some. Pointless? You betcha. DarkAudit 16:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Textbook case of WP:NOT. Yechiel Man 20:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. & per WP:NOT. Carlossuarez46 21:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pavel Vozenilek 02:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete trivia. Bulldog123 16:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The Filmaker 18:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.  -- Pax:Vobiscum 15:05, 20 May 2007 (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.