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. postdlf (talk) 20:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep Passes
WP:LISTN - there are lots of sources about television actresses. Per
WP:LISTPURP there isn't anything wrong with a category and a list being redundant, as they serve different purposes. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 22:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep There is nothing wrong with having a category and a list covering the same thing, per
WP:LISTPURP, since a list is more easily browsed, and since a list allows tracking removals. The fact that some other article does not exist is not a convincing reason to delete a list about an extremely notable collection of entries in a field which has had a great deal of coverage for many years. Feel free to create a list of American television actors, perhaps from the existing category "American male television actors."
Edison (
talk) 23:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep - Rational navigational function for this list. Certainly a bit broad in parameters. The fact there is no equivalent list for male actors is an OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST argument.
Carrite (
talk) 01:13, 13 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:NOTDUP, "It is neither improper nor uncommon to simultaneously have a category, a list, and a navigation template which all cover the same topic. These redundant systems of organizing information are considered to be complementary, not inappropriately duplicative. Furthermore, arguing that a category duplicates a list (or vice versa) at a deletion discussion is not a valid reason for deletion and should be avoided."
Northamerica1000(talk) 01:36, 14 January 2014 (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.
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. postdlf (talk) 20:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep Passes
WP:LISTN - there are lots of sources about television actresses. Per
WP:LISTPURP there isn't anything wrong with a category and a list being redundant, as they serve different purposes. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 22:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep There is nothing wrong with having a category and a list covering the same thing, per
WP:LISTPURP, since a list is more easily browsed, and since a list allows tracking removals. The fact that some other article does not exist is not a convincing reason to delete a list about an extremely notable collection of entries in a field which has had a great deal of coverage for many years. Feel free to create a list of American television actors, perhaps from the existing category "American male television actors."
Edison (
talk) 23:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep - Rational navigational function for this list. Certainly a bit broad in parameters. The fact there is no equivalent list for male actors is an OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST argument.
Carrite (
talk) 01:13, 13 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:NOTDUP, "It is neither improper nor uncommon to simultaneously have a category, a list, and a navigation template which all cover the same topic. These redundant systems of organizing information are considered to be complementary, not inappropriately duplicative. Furthermore, arguing that a category duplicates a list (or vice versa) at a deletion discussion is not a valid reason for deletion and should be avoided."
Northamerica1000(talk) 01:36, 14 January 2014 (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.