Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom by age

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) —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 12:52, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom by age

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

Contains mostly OR (I doubt there are references for the fact that Robert Walpole's retirement lasted 3 years and 35 days...) and trivial factoids. WP:LISTCRUFT. Randykitty (talk) 13:49, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 13:52, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep mathematical calculations are not original research. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:50, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but assertions such as "[t]he prime minister with the longest retirement" and other trivia are unsourced OR. Even if you include that, too, under "mathematical calculations", the fact that this is absolute LISTCRUFT remains. --Randykitty (talk) 08:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A clear and concise article on all of Britain's PMs by age. And very much to the point. Boy Named Stu (talk) 12:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Simply put, this is not WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH AusLondonder (talk) 10:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom, for the exact same reasons as applied in this AFD discussion for List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom by date of birth. - Chrism would like to hear from you 13:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The nom's "trivial factoids" and "LISTCRUFT" arguments were not addressed by most "keep" commenters. T. Canens (talk) 22:59, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 22:59, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nomination's arguments of "trivial factoids" and "LISTCRUFT" are best avoided per WP:ITSCRUFT, WP:WHOCARES and WP:USELESS. They are not supported by policy or guideline and so are inadequate as reasons to delete. The relevant guideline is WP:LISTN and the topic passes it - see Today's Prime Ministers are younger than ever or Prime Ministers: Salisbury to Blair, for example. Andrew D. (talk) 11:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable topics such as this do not qualify as WP:LISTCRUFT. Halftime Hero (talk) 04:48, 30 August 2015 (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.