Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Living Presidents of the United States

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. Kurykh (talk) 04:49, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Living Presidents of the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

WP:INDISCRIMINATE for this is just an excessive listing of miscellaneous statistics. Fails WP:LISTN for the time period in which a former president is living has not been discussed in RS. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 03:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 03:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 03:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 03:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The office of US President is of sufficient importance in world history that numerous reliable sources have discussed, at least briefly, the number of living present and former such office holders at various points in time from the 19th through the 21st century: See [1], [2] and [3], as well as [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10],[11], The number of living former and present US presidents at various points in history is thus shown to have been of considerable interest This article performs an encyclopedic function by presenting the reliably sourced information in a useful form. Edison (talk) 04:48, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The variation in numbers of living presidents is not shown adequately in any other article, and this article presents readers with a valuable look at the topic. Earthscent (talk) 04:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep With 1000 to 7000 visits per day, it shows the page is really useful. Wykx (talk) 10:27, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the references and page views cited above demonstrate the value of this article. Lepricavark (talk) 21:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The arguments presented above for keep seem strong to me. I particularly think the numbers of living presidents at different times is useful and does not seem to be covered by any other articles. Dunarc (talk) 12:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious Keep, as per the above. I would add that there is no credible argument that this list is indiscriminate, given the subject. Yes, every president is included at one point or another, but 44 people over the course of 240 years seems pretty narrow to me. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 16:30, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• WP:SNOW Keep This is notable to academic interests as well, I do not see the need for this to run for the full 7 days. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:07, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Mere statistics only, any former president has no role any more so their number is meaningless (wrt state roles). Interesting yes, encyclopedic no. OTOH, in {{Lists of US Presidents and Vice Presidents}} I am missing a more important list: VP-takeovers (Ford, LBJ), and similar situations (change of law in this happened?). -DePiep (talk) 08:20, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I add:

1. Also more relevant: periods of non-president (between killing of JFK and swearing in of LBJ?, temporally one pres below zero?).

2. And what about that Haig/Reagen 'takeover'?

3. Logically correct in the article table, but weird reading: the 1st inauguration of George Washington is mentioned (+1 living pres), but not his second one (no pres died that day).

- DePiep (talk) 19:24, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment You have expressed some thoughts, but they are not of much relevance to this AFD .If you want other articles, or additions to existing articles, go and do some editing. Edison (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Already did. -DePiep (talk) 03:53, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - as per above.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:07, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep — somewhat disingenuous to dismiss this as a mere "miscellaneous statistic". Popular media discuss this topic on a regular basis, for instance in widely circulated magazines we have https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/slideshows/on-jan-20-5-former-us-presidents-will-be-alive and https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/here-are-all-5-living-presidents-together-at-the-george-w-bush-library/275296/ , and both of these articles discuss not only the current set of former presidents but also some history of this set as of previous eras. The WP:LISTN criteria of "a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" certainly seems to be established. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 22:13, 26 February 2017 (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.