Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of slaves


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Mediran ( t  •  c ) 01:25, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

List of slaves

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The function of this list can be entirely fulfilled by the slaves category. "Slaves" is a category with the potential to be incredibly broad in scope, and thus, this list has no reasonable topic restraint. The list adds no use beyond that of the category, and the should be deleted, as the category will suffice. Ducknish (talk) 21:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Slaves are no different to notable people. Paul Bardson (talk) 22:52, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * But it seems as though their notability is entirely separate from their being slaves. For the majority of the list, being a slave is simply an aspect of their life that does not factor into their individual notability, and thus, it would be better suited as a category. Ducknish (talk) 23:10, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * None of what you wrote is an actual standard for lists, neither expressed in guidelines nor reflected in practice. We do not limit lists to what "factor[s] into their individual notability", but instead use both lists and categories as complementary indexes and navigational aids. See WP:CLN and WP:LISTPURP, and for examples of this widespread practice, see any of the lists for people by place of origin, by educational institution, by year of birth or death...all of which are significant biographical facts but never why or for what someone is notable. What made you think otherwise? postdlf (talk) 16:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Their slavery is part of their notability. However, those less notable (i.e. without articles) should mostly be emancipated from this list, e.g. Aelfsige. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep A considerable portion of people on the list have articles, which proves their notability. However, I do agree with Clarity that those slaves who are less notable should be removed. Kevin12xd (contribs) 00:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: I agree with the opinions expressed that there are many on the list who are, in fact notable. However, I would say that for precious few of them is slavery the lynchpin of their notability. If you could remove the fact that many of these people are slaves and still find them notable enough for an article, there's no need for an article serving as a list to categorize them in this way. Ducknish (talk) 00:06, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. I disagree. It doesn't have to be the linchpin, just a significant factor in their lives (and slavery is surely that). Albert Einstein is best known for his physics, but his unrelated Jewishness is hard to ignore (e.g. List of Jewish Nobel laureates, which is a sublist of List of Jews). Clarityfiend (talk) 13:59, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per WP:OUTCOMES via Articles for deletion/List of electricians which had basically the same parameters. Some people notable for being others things who happened to once have been electricians and people notable for being electricians. I !voted for deletion (weak) there and would probably do the same here were it not for the fact that community consensus seems to disagree at this stage. Stalwart 111  00:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep as standard index of notable people by a shared fact of biographical significance, complementary to the category structure. postdlf (talk) 16:45, 26 March 2013 (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.