Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of Ancient Roman governors


 * 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. Not seeing a consensus to delete here. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Lists of Ancient Roman governors

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This list of lists is an exact replica of Category:Lists of Roman governors. Avilich (talk) 14:47, 26 March 2021 (UTC) Before someone spams WP:NOTDUP and WP:CLN, the supposed benefits of lists enumerated there don't seem to exist or be relevant for this one in particular (unlike, say, List of consuls as compared with Category:Roman consuls). The very purpose of this page is to be identical with the category, only it has the added difficulty of requiring editors to add content repeatedly every time a new list is created. One could link to the category instead of the page and it wouldn't make any difference for someone navigating. Avilich (talk) 20:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't see the problem here. It seems like a reasonable navigational aid. See WP:NOTDUP. TompaDompa (talk) 19:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep The nomination fails to grasp our policy which is documented at WP:CLN. Lists, categories and other navigational tools are not alternatives; they are complementary.  If they agree with each other then this is a good thing as it tends to indicate that there are no omissions.  Lists have more potential when they are stable, as they are likely to be in this case.  They can be enhanced with citations, pictures and prose and then considered for featuring at WP:FL. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware of NOTDUP and CLN, and the supposed benefits of lists enumerated there don't seem to exist or be relevant for this one in particular (unlike, say, List of consuls as compared with Category:Roman consuls). The very purpose of this page is to be identical with the category, only it has the added difficulty of requiring editors to add content repeatedly every time a new list is created. One could link to the category instead of the page and it wouldn't make any difference for someone navigating. It's difficult to see how this list (of lists...) in particular could be "enhanced with citations, pictures and prose", let alone be "considered for featuring at WP:FL". Avilich (talk) 19:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Methinks the map is a significant benefit, and I can think of a few ways to improve the list such as adding the time period for each of the entries and writing an introductory paragraph or two summarizing what "governor" and "province" mean in this context. Moreover, we can add WP:REDLINKS for missing entries to the list (such as the ones found at Template:Roman governors). TompaDompa (talk) 20:55, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Maps are so easy to find they're a non-entity here, whereas "governor" and "province" can just be linked in the category page itself (I actually doubt anyone browsing won't already have a sufficient inkling of what these things mean – the qualifier "Roman" doesn't change the common-sense meaning of those words). Navigation is much simpler when the means for it are direct and straightforward, which categories are, and articles with screen pollutants (like superfluous maps and stray text) are not. Categories also have no need for maintenance, whereas articles (by your own admission) do. It's just an unnecessary bother. Avilich (talk) 23:58, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge to Roman governor, no reason for this to be a separate page and it can provide context as mentioned above. Reywas92Talk 00:58, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That works for me. I suppose it would've been possible to just merge the content without going through WP:AfD; I reckon that would not have been particularly controversial. TompaDompa (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I suppose it's reasonable to merge and have the pages listed there. Not as pointless as this article in its current standalone form. Avilich (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge per previous.67.173.23.66 (talk) 15:37, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Perfectly valid navigational list. Roman governor links to Lists of Ancient Roman governors.  That's easier than listing the 26 list of Roman governor articles there.   D r e a m Focus  16:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The category is also a perfectly valid navigation list. Which means they can't both be valid at the same time. Avilich (talk) 21:51, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The rules are quite clear. You don't destroy one because you favor another, both can exist together. WP:CLN   D r e a m Focus  02:59, 3 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per others and WP:Readers first. Perfectly valid and helpful navigational list. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:41, 2 April 2021 (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.