Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of television personalities

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 delete. No Guru 19:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of television personalities

Indiscriminate list of anyone who's appeared on TV ever. Unmaintainable and unencyclopedic. Otto4711 05:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Certainly better served by a category, but even that strikes me as unnecessary. The subject is too all encompassing to be useful. What possible homework assignment could be aided by this article? You gotta salute the work that went into it, though. - Richfife 05:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - arbitary, useless, unmaintainable and indiscriminate listcruft. Worse still, it encourages people to create articles on non-notable losing reality TV contestants. And they have clearly been !voted off this island. MER-C 06:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete What MER-C said. --Jayron 32 06:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per MERC. meshach 06:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is a prime example of an indiscriminate list. Listing everyone who ever appeared on TV is not useful or encyclopedic. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete phew, yeah, too indiscriminate. --Canley 13:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information, a bare list of links, etc. But this article is just those things. Guy (Help!) 14:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. ← ANAS ^Talk? 16:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, too broad etc. Punkmorten 17:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unreasonably broad in scope.-- danntm ^T _C 18:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A necessarily incomplete and ultimately pointless list of names. Not in any way an appropriate encyclopedia article.--Anthony.bradbury 19:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Why are so many people creating these pointless lists? If the same energy went into improving and referencing existing articles it would have a tremendous impact the quality of Wikipedia. This is list is particularly broad, pointless and Wikipedia is not a directory. WJBscribe 20:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A full-time staff of editors could work for years and not even make this close to complete. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note This article has existed for over 4 years before getting an AFD. Is that a record? - Richfife 04:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Note Did I say 4 years? I meant to say 5: [1] - Richfife 19:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above points. 4 years? Jesus. Sharkface217 05:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOT. The article existed 4 years ago bc Wikipedia was much smaller, and had less references. Now it should go. -Patstuart^talk|edits 14:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. 4 years is a long time on Wikipedia.NeoJustin 22:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete listcruft. Danny Lilithborne 22:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete too many. However, it could be Keep, and split into countries e.g. List of English TV personalities, List of French TV personalities, so the lists will be smaller. Only a suggestion. 86.20.53.195 17:43, 12 December 2006 (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.