Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nigerians

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Redwolf24 00:23, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Completely unmaintainable list. Now if it were "List of Nigerians who have tangoed with the queen of Spain" we might just have a maintainable list Hansonc 03:43, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, no offense to Nigeria, but this is nationcruft.DavidH 03:47, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Split into lists like "List of Nigerian footballers" or "List of Nigerian politicias" etc., which ought to be more maintainable. Nateji77 03:59, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Split per Nateji77. Cyclone49 06:23, 28 July 2005 (UTC) Keep I didn't realise it was a list of famous Nigerians, I just thought it was a list of every Nigerian. Cyclone49 10:57, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. See List of people by nationality. Do you want to delete them all? John Barleycorn 06:27, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: we do have pages like List of Scots and List of Swedes. Be consistent. Of course, as long as this "list" is just one unwikified name, it is pointless. Uppland 07:01, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep now and continue to expand. Uppland 19:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Couldn't this be speedyed, on the basis that it is non-notable, and the content does not match the title ? --Simon Cursitor 08:02, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Please note the existence and contents of Category:Nigerian people. Uncle G 08:25:43, 2005-07-28 (UTC)
• Keep and allow for organic growth. Kappa 09:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand. (Althought, IMO, these lists should be something like "List of Famous X") - Skysmith 11:01, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and replace with a redirect to Category:Nigerian People If someone is famous enough to belong on this list, that person is famous enough to have at least a stub. Robert A West 14:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • If they are famous enough to have a stub, surely they are famous enough to tell users who they are without forcing them to click on a link to get there... Kappa 15:17, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's what subcategories are for. A List of Nigerian Presidents would be useful -- someone might be looking for who ruled Nigeria in 1972. A List of Nigerians is of limited utility and is never going to be maintained properly. The fact that we have other equally useless and unmaintainable lists is IMO no reason to add more. Robert A West 18:47, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to List of Notable Nigerians. RJFJR 16:32, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep. The intro clearly states that it is a list of prominent Nigerian people. Actually, very few lists of people have a "famous" or "notable" qualification attatched to their title. It seems to be understood that lists of this type include "notable" people only, since there are Wikipedia articles on them. We have List of physicians, List of chefs and List of stand-up comedians and very few people seem to interpret those as attempts at listing all the physicians, chefs and stand-up comedians in the world - or calling it "professioncruft" or something similar. Why treat Nigerians differently? Generally, it seems to me as if most lists of people on wikipedia naturally adjust the notability bar in accordance with the size of the group the selection comes from. If this article lists Nigerians of some international fame, it can easily co-exist with a longer List of Nigerian footballers with footballers that are notable on a national level. / Alarm 17:49, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the time of nomination there was no intro that stated that it was a list of prominent Nigerians. Now that the page has developed into something more than a single non-wikified name I'm willing to change my vote to keep as well. Hansonc 22:32, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Keep perfectly legitimate article, we already have several lists of people by nationality, should split it only if it exceeds recommended size. PatGallacher 18:00, 2005 July 28 (UTC)

Comment: to clarify, if I'd had the chance to vote on list of Alaskans, list of Chicagoans, or list of Martians, I would have voted delete on them too. They're just not encyclopedia articles; they're phone book pages, without any data, and they'll never be accurate because they won't be complete. WP is NOT a trivia game or a directory. IOW, the reasoning that there are other articles like this doesn't persuade me. DavidH 18:38, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, there are many similar lists, say List of Czechs. If it grows too much it could be splitted. Pavel Vozenilek 19:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I don't see how this could be split Pedant 21:50, 2005 July 28 (UTC)
• Keep: difficult to justify deletion of Nigeria's list without deleting the others. Flowerparty ^talk 22:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is that an offer? Robert A West 18:49, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dunno, I'm tempted. Do you reckon we've got a case? Flowerparty ^talk 13:16, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Categories, people, this is what categories are for. Still, I think we need to treat this as a matter of policy rather than deletion, so we can implement the same policy (be it lists, categories, or both) across the board without the "it isn't being done with X so we can't do it with Y" arguments. I'll go with delete, and replace with Category:Nigerians, though I suspect the latter part's been done already. -R. fiend 23:12, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's impossible to replace lists like this with categories. Kappa 23:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why exactly is that? Because the categories don't have brief blurbs on the subjects? Well, whatever they want to know about the people is one click away. -R. fiend 13:26, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • So it would be like a lucky dip, click on everything till you find something you like? Kappa 13:38, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Wow. Four whole things to click. How will people find the time? Presumably they have some idea of what they're looking for, anyway. Or if they're just browsing Nigerians (perhaps looking for the guy who owes them $3,000,000 in money covered with black ink) they'll probably want to read the full articles anyway. -R. fiend 18:12, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
          • If they have some idea what they are looking for, a list will help them to find it, and a category won't. Kappa 00:07, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Lists and categories perform very different functions. -- Visviva 03:09, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Totally impossible list. The introduction might say it's of "notable" Nigerians, but the title says it's not. There are more Nigerians being born every day, and, of course, every Nigerian since the creation of the state has to be listed. There is no List of Americans or List of Britons, and there must not be. Further, one cannot argue from one wrong (a silly list of Springfield Missourians) to excuse another. Geogre 04:17, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • • There is actually a List of English people, as well as lists of people by U.S. state, despite the fact that there are more Englishmen and Californians born every day as well. I would be very interested to know if anyone has argued for their deletion with the arguments used here. / Alarm 10:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • So if pepole are really going to expect every single Nigerian person ever born to be included on that list, why can't it simply be renamed? Kappa 04:30, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • To Geogre and Kappa, as well as Skysmith and RJFJR above: There is actually a clearly stated official policy that the list article's title should not include "notable" or something similar. Naming conventions#Lists says "Put a list of Xs as list of Xs, rather than Xs, famous Xs, listing of important Xs, list of noted Xs, list of all Xs, etc." Lists (stand-alone lists)#Naming conventions goes on to specifically mention lists of people by nationality (obviously not such a strange concept to those involved in writing the naming policy), saying "People are either list of Finns or list of French people, preferring List of _ people". Any concerns about this probably ought to be discussed over at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions, rather than here. / Alarm 10:59, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - It is far to broad to maintain. Specific categories (not lists) should be, and are used. This is just a waste. Categories are visible to article viewers, and will be updated. A list like this will never be complete or maintained. --rob 09:49, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There are several pros with a list, which have been mentioned in other discussions. Most inportantly, it can contain red links to notable people who haven't got articles yet. This can actually stimulate the growth of Wikipedia and, in this specific case, possibly help counter systemic bias. Another argument is that it helps navigation. Since categories contain subcategories, a top-level list with the most notable names provides a good general overview. Clicking your way from Category:Nigerian people through Category:Nigerian people by occupation and Category:Nigerian sportspeople down to Category:Nigerian footballers to find Jay-Jay Okocha isn't all that convenient. / Alarm 10:35, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: The "red links" become a problem when there are many poorly maintained, redundant lists, each with conflicting name spellings (especially non-English names). It's easy for a newbie/novice to create an article with the same name on such a list, without realizing it's not the same person. That's less likely to happen with a stub. These "red links" are bad way that people by-pass vfd process for non-notables. A non-notable person can get on such a list much easier than they could get an article, causing a problem later with a notable person with the same name comes along. Anyhow, I've now realized my problem is with wikipedia's list policy, and not specific to the Nigeria list. --rob 18:32, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep of course. There are over a hundred articles in category:lists of people by nationality. I can't believe some people are voting to delete this one. Categories do not replace lists. This one could probably do with lots of red links. I dare say there are politicians in Nigeria who rule over millions of people about whom we do not have an article, while we have thousands of articles about relative nonentities from the U.S., U.K. etc. CalJW 15:35, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- Longhair | Talk 23:47, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• A Massive Keep. As John Barleycorn has mentioned it is a necessary component link from List of people by nationality, one of the six major links from the Biography Portal. List of Nigerians was only recently switched blue and so it is perfectly fair to expect it to be pretty stumpy at the moment. Furthermore, Kappa and CalJW are entirely right to point out that lists peform a different function to categories: the use of tags can be invaluable in locating the relevant person quickly. Also List of people by nationality refers to different peoples by the appropriate adjectival form and not just, e.g., United States people. Anadine 11:17, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there are many similar lists. As it gets bigger it will evolve into more specific lists.--nixie 13:19, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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.