Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dutch supercentenarians (3rd nomination)

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 redirect to List of supercentenarians by continent. And merge from history where deemed appropriate. I have to disregard the opinion by Crveni5 because it is not based in any Wikipedia policy or guideline. Sandstein 10:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Dutch supercentenarians

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is effectively redundant since the relevant people will still be listed at List of supercentenarians by continent. Relevant content should be merged with the European section. This country specific list is much too narrowly focused with only three notable people and one source for the other entries. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 23:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect. Redundent and too narrow. There is significant precedent for merging country specific lists of the superold into the master list. Legacypac (talk) 23:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(as creator) Merge and Redirect. I created this list page 11 years to merge various stub articles (see my comment at the 1st AFD). However, this shows no sign of growing beyond its tiny state, which is too small. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:44, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:44, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restore redirect This is essentially a duplicate article. Natureium (talk) 19:21, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Natureium: It's not: only one person from the Dutch list is mentioned on the European list. — JFG ^talk 10:17, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is small overlap, but these lists are about age only and that one entry is the only truly notable age on the Dutch list. The important information is redundant, not the old person directory that is this article, and any future cases of notable age will be on the European list to. Newshunter12 (talk) 11:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Redirect~~, but expand European list to the top 100 people. Otherwise, in the current status listing the oldest 50 Europeans, only one person from the Netherlands is mentioned, negating the AfD rationale of duplicate information. We have lists of the 100 oldest Americans, British, French, German, Italian, Japanese, etc. It would be odd that a list for all of Europe would include fewer individuals than national lists. — JFG ^talk 12:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I have worked to improve the article today: new lede section, updated sourcing throughout, two additional people who died recently, added a freely licensed illustration. Merging would lose too much information, because only one Dutch supercentenarian is currently on the list of the 50 oldest Europeans. I would still suggest expanding the European list to 100 people. — JFG ^talk 17:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I was previously running on the assumption that these were some of the oldest Europeans. As they are not in the 50 oldest, expanding the list to the oldest 100 or 150 would be sensible. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups and now you have trigered the Wikipedia trolls. Crveni5 (talk)

We should not increase the European supercentenarian section to accommodate "young" un-notable Dutch people. Wikipedia is not a WP:MEMORIAL nor a directory of every really old person editors can conjure up. Newshunter12 (talk) 23:51, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect to List of supercentenarians by continent. The relevant supercentenarians, both present and future, are/will be on that list, so keeping this list is redundant. Adding pointless things like one picture and un-notable people to the article should not save it from being merged to a more appropriate article, nor should we increase the European supercentenarian section to accommodate "young" un-notable Dutch people. They lived. They avoided the Reaper longer then most. They died. Wikipedia is not a WP:MEMORIAL nor a directory of old people. Newshunter12 (talk) 23:51, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Another attack on Wikipedia articles related to human longevity. This is a systemic attempt to delete all articles one by one. Lists by continent - gone. List for Australia - gone. Numerous attempts at deleting the Japanese article - failed to date. List of oldest people - under threat. Now this is the next list to be targeted. Jimmy Wales where are you? Crveni5 (talk)

Nothing you have said is a valid argument to keep this article or grounded in any Wikipedia policy. Your "argument" is a conspiracy theory opinion not grounded in fact List of supercentenarians by continent. Newshunter12 (talk) 04:17, 18 November 2018 (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.