Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of politicians with economics training


 * 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.  Sandstein  04:53, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

List of politicians with economics training

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a clear violation of our rules on intersecting lists--there is nothing inherently notable in the idea of a politician having had down some sort of academic work in economics. Unless the subject of the intersection (politicians with economic training) has itself been discussed in multiple, reliable, independent sources, this list should be deleted. I would argue that any list that is of the form "People in profession X with academic training in Subject Y" is inherently non-notable unless covered in reliable sources. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIR, specifically point #7 about non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations. In addition, this list is almost entirely unreferenced and woefully incomplete.  This is not necessarily a reason for deletion on its own, but the omission of a politician from this list implies that he/she has no training in economics, which is a problem.  There is no clear definition of what constitutes "economics training".  Does that mean they need to have an advanced degree in economics, or would it suffice to have read a book on economics?  I think that if you dig hard enough, you'll find that the vast majority of politicians have some sort of formal or informal training in economics (since it's part of almost every politician's job), it might be easier to create the shorter List of politicians without economics training.  &mdash;SW&mdash; babble 03:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete partly per Snottywong: the criteria for inclusion are so arbitrary that the list is useless. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 03:56, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 04:39, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The term "economics training" is vague and could refer to anything from an economics class in high school to Ph.D. in Economics.--Huh direction (talk) 10:22, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I concur with the above: "economics training" is such a vague phrasing that it renders the list essentially open-ended. The term "politician" is also wielded somewhat sloppily here, I think. List of American elected politicians with economics degrees would be encyclopedic; this is not. My opinion. Carrite (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * move to List of politician economists or similar. Notable as a quick encyclopaedic reference point per WP:Lists "index of articles." This is vague, i agree, so lets make it more specific. Per Carritte, since you agree a similar topic is worthwhile then why not move instead of dleteing.Lihaas (talk) 21:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * We can't move it to Carrite's title because that's not what this list is; it intentionally under-defines "economic training". Moving it would require going through every single entry and checking to see if they hold a degree, and thus would really be no better than deleting and starting from scratch. "List of politician economists" would only refer to those people who simultaneously are politicians and economists as a profession, and that is an extremely narrow list, possibly a non-existent one (since it would be rare for someone to simultaneously hold both jobs".  As a side note, I actually think that Carrite's suggestion would also be unencyclopedic; we absolutely should not be making lists of "People in profession X with degrees in Field Y".  Qwyrxian (talk) 00:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete far too vague. WP:INDISCRIMINATE. It would be impossible to verify if someone took a high school economics course and yet there's probably many politicians who have, and are very competent. Someone might go to business school and take a few courses in economics, while someone else might not. This list could easily degenerate into a platform for "my candidate is smarter than your candidate". Dzlife (talk) 13:53, 26 August 2011 (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.