Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/List of tall men

This discussion has gotten very big. In addition it seems fairly clear it's going to get either no-concensus or keep. Furthermore List of tall women got keep already. I'm wondering if maybe it's time to close this. If the list still annoys some Wikipedians enough it can be AfD'd again in 2 months. It'd probably be smart not to do it sooner than that for a variety of reasons.--T. Anthony 09:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm, this must be sent to deletion review. The List of tall women was much more poorly done and got keep. Arguments for keep here were near a majority, the list was well sourced, and the concept is one of anthropometric/sociocultural study. A degree of ambiguity is not an overwhelming reason for deletion. If it were a great many articles and lists that survived handily would have to be deleted. I expected a reluctant "no concensus" as I know the list annoys people. However this was a bad call and close to imperiousness.--T. Anthony 17:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I definitely support that. According to my count, there were 17 delete votes (one of which could be discounted ("per nom"), but wasn't) and 17 keep votes (five of which were discounted).  Now, I know that Wikipedia is not a democracy and AfDs are decided through consensus and not voting, but 17 vs. 13 hardly seems a consensus.  Here are the votes as I counted them (note: although User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back's "keep" vote was discounted, he makes a more extensive argument in two separate comments).  I apologize in advance for any spelling errors in user names (strikethrough means discounted).
 * Delete: JzG, Coelacan, Mel Etitis, Nearly Headless Nick, Otto4711, Wizardman, Durova, Moreschi, Merope, Gassy Guy, Carnildo, Doc, A Man in Black, Calton, WJBScribe, Ben Aveling, SeraphimBlade
 * Keep: T. Anthony, Pomte, RCS, Halbared, Edison, Black Falcon, 137.222.10.67, ASDFGHJKL, Julia Rossi, Steve Lamacq, OhConfucius, TrojanMan , Mhking , Gilliam, The Fat Man Who Never Came Back , JJay, Chensiyuan
 * In response to the argument that the criterion for the list is subjective, I think the statement by User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back is appropriate:
 * "In cases like this, whining that a certain adjective must have a precise, independetly verified definition arrived at through scientific rigor is a fruitless semantic exercise, inimical to the subjective nature of language itself. NOR applies to 'new definitions of pre-existing terms;' it does not preclude the variable, reasonable interpretation of very common adjectives. Trust people to build consensus; they'll decide what tall means, and the meaning will fluctuate from time to time, as well it should." Black Falcon 17:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I've never sent anything to deletion review, could someone do it for me? Plus I have other things I'd rather be doing and have a doctor's appointment in a few hours.--T. Anthony 17:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It is my first time as well, but it seems simple enough. I just need to appropriately formulate the argument for undeletion first.  I will send it to DRV sometime today. Cheers, Black Falcon 18:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * After talking to the closer I think we should consider putting Articles for deletion/List of tall women on DRV as well. Keeping one and deleting the other is something both sides seem to agree is peculiar. I'd prefer they both stay, but I'd most prefer some kind of rationality to only one staying.--T. Anthony 19:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)