Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of richest people in the world


 * 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. Darn, I guess my hope for finding sugar daddy or momma is going to have to be delayed yet again. I kid, I kid... deleting based on the fine rationales presented below. The World's Billionaires already exists. Thanks everyone for contributing and assuming good faith! Missvain (talk) 16:04, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

List of richest people in the world

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I don't know that I expect this will be uncontroversial, but I don't really see the point in this list. The Manual of Style discourages us from using these types of time specifications at all, and we're not really in the business of providing "real time" lists that need to be updated by the minute.

The scope of the article is entirely confined to the report of Forbes, and from what I can tell, this content is already better covered in The World's Billionaires about the Forbes source itself. That article does a much better job of structuring pretty much the same information in a stable encyclopedic format, reporting each year rather than trying to have a "real time" ticker maintained of who is what at this very second.

As it stands, this article just straddles the line between excessive listings of unexplained statistics with little to no encyclopedic context, and timely news on who's who. G M G talk  16:14, 17 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Redundant to The World's Billionaires. Not even a newspaper carries a day-by-day ranking. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * When there are changes at the top of the rankings there are some articles published like the original and this other one republished by newspapers Wykx  (talk)


 * Delete. because The World's Billionaires article does it better so this WP:REDUNDANT. Wm335td (talk) 21:16, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:26, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps better but not completely the same, since my subsequent merger proposal. Wykx  (talk)


 * Comment When one's nomination for deletion of a page title contains the phrase, "As it stands," it should be a clue that one should be posting comments or an RFC on the article's Talk page instead. AfD is not for cleanup. With the obvious exceptions of copyvio or BLP vio or some other clear and present danger, of course. Anarchangel (talk) 02:19, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * "As it stands" refers to the scope of the article.  G M G  talk  11:35, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge The The World's Billionaires starts with "List of richest people" redirects here. For a real-time list, see List of richest people in the world. Maybe we could integrate the content of real time rankings in one section of 'The World's Billionaires' knowing that for example the richest man in the world is now Bernard Arnault but this information is not anywhere else than in the current article. Thus this information is of value when looking information of 'richest people in the world'. Wykx  (talk)
 * I can't think of any statistic we keep track of in realtime. That's not something an encyclopedia does. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:12, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Is the richest people in the world's name a statistic? Wykx  (talk)
 * Okay, ranking then. No day-by-day, week-by-week or even month-by-month rankings. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:07, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem is that there are multiple overlapping problems in scope all at the same time.
 * WP:NOTNEWS - This is essentially a running news ticker, that is fundamentally transient has no enduring value to any revision of the page.
 * WP:REALTIME - The list is both ambiguous to readers, at least to any reader who doesn't know how to check the article history, because it's not really real time, nothing on Wikipedia truly is, and is only current as of the last good revision. As is inherently the problem with real time content, it simply cannot ever reach any version that is both stable and educationally useful.
 * WP:INDISCRIMINATE - There is almost no encyclopedic prose that can ever be useful here, and what is here is fairly arbitrary. We highlight richest woman, while Forbes themselves highlight people by gender, by country, by newcomers, by age, and by sector. We've chosen to limit the article to 20 for no apparent objective reason. Forbes has only 20 on the first page, but they don't limit it to only 20. It's not clear why we choose to highlight a few companies in particular, when Forbes doesn't seem to do this at all.
 * WP:ARTICLESABOUTONESOURCE - This is such a rare problem that we don't even have any guidance for it at all, though it probably also falls under INDISCRIMINATE in principle. We simply don't have articles where the scope is limited to a single source unless the article is about that source. We already have an article about the source at The World's Billionaires, and this isn't actually a list of the richest people, it's a list of the richest people according to Forbes, for no apparent objective reason preferring Forbes to any other source where they may disagree. We have similar articles, like 100 Women (BBC), but that is again about the source itself. The analogous article there would be something like List of most important women, where when you get into the fine print, it's actually List of important women according to the BBC.
 * Merging this with the article on the source may solve some of those problems, but it doesn't solve the remainder.  G M G  talk  13:22, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Trying to maintain this in real time is like having an article that tries to keep track of the current Dow Jones average: Impossible and not very useful. WQUlrich (talk) 04:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete', since as Wm335td points out :"The World's Billionaires article does it better so this WP:REDUNDANT". Net worth of these individuals fluctuates with every stock market move and a dynamic real time list is a maintenance issue.--Eostrix (talk) 07:04, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:FORK, although if you insist, redirect instead. Bearian (talk) 20:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete A list of the richest people according to one source, with figures that change literally every day and therefore will always potentially be out of date, isn't a particularly useful article, and isn't what Wikipedia is for. Neiltonks (talk) 14:51, 24 January 2020 (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.