- 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. Noting that CSD G5: pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, is also applicable. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
List of works by individuals
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of works by individuals ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I've been party to various "is this a meaningful list or isn't it" debates, but I reckon this takes the biscuit. WP:LISTCRUFT -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
list of Lists-related deletion discussions.
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sure it isn't a meaningless list, the list isn't intended to be only a simple list of links, but should include the number of works to every entry, thereby allowing a comparison of lifetime production. I think my original inspiration was Wittgenstein "genius" but only published 1 book during his lifetime, compared to, for example, Picasso who was prolific. John B123, Rodw reviewed the article and didn't think it was needing deletion, so your opinion is currently in a minority (probably) of 1:3. Perhaps you'd like to refer to Chunking (psychology) "...individual pieces of an information set are broken down and then grouped together in a meaningful whole...", I couldn't think of any other meaning to "biscuit" than dog-food (with biscuits) (I don't own a dog), or biscuits (human biscuits), I don't own any either, and don't want to (sorry to be flippant) i am uniquepw ( talk) 18:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete nothing notable or defining about the entries in this list, and thus no need for it to exist. Suggest, based on history and articles under discussion, creator take a pause to learn more about Wikipedia policies before diving into creation. Courtesy pings to John B123 who are mentioned above. StarM 18:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment reading further into their cited reason for creation makes me endorse the second half of my comment. The issue is not Tolstoy v. Leo Tolstoy (as in disambiguation needed), which seems to be the
creation reason. Courtesy @
PamD:
StarM 19:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- @ Star Mississippi: "nothing notable or defining about the entries in this list, and thus no need for it to exist." the subject is " productivity" "works" ---> number of works i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- the list would be useful because by seeing numbers of works produced: for example
Wittgenstein produced 1 published philosophical work in his lifetime +
"genius" compared to
Pablo Picasso - who produced
1000's, people could identify patterns of causes to different productivity - the defining aspects are: creativity & productivity
i am uniquepw (
talk) 19:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC) correction after signature
i am uniquepw (
talk) 19:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- btw @ DoubleGrazing: Crufts < ---> WP:LISTCRUFT "biscuit" ----> sorry about your biscuit, it wasn't me honestly i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC) correction after signature i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:21, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- @ DoubleGrazing: your biscuit was taken (the guy had flees, he must have taken it and ... (had fleas) - I don't fleas, and I never have i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC) pinged after signature (the only thing I have done needing an apology, because I'm not guilty, by rights of ... my tale is true, I am not a roamer (i.e. "indiscriminate") to sniff out i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:34, 6 March 2021 (UTC) corrected error after signature ---> "done" (a do-do I don't stink, really - my work is eau de toilette, not a stinky mess) i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment reading further into their cited reason for creation makes me endorse the second half of my comment. The issue is not Tolstoy v. Leo Tolstoy (as in disambiguation needed), which seems to be the
creation reason. Courtesy @
PamD:
StarM 19:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment an AfD discussion is not really the place for the above,
Uniquepw
StarM 19:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- true i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC) change after signature i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- I copied the article to my sandbox, so it's possible I won't argue if others think deletion is necessary i am uniquepw ( talk) 20:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete (or merge to List of everything on Earth) per WP:SALAT: "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value". Hopelessly indiscriminate. Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- i am unique pw is moving the goalposts. How numerically prolific an individual is - something not explicitly specified as a criterion or implied in any way by the article title - is a rather meaningless statistic. As Gimli would say, the Sistine Chapel ceiling "still only counts as one" work, the same as the three-word poem " Lines on the Antiquity of Microbes". Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete so I agree the scope is too broad and decided to divide the article to list of fine art works, list of scientific writings, list of fictional writings, list of philosophical writings - based on number of works, lifetime, years active ... within my sandbox i am uniquepw ( talk) 22:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment There are a lot of Category:Works by creator. Category:Philosophical works by writer, you got list of works by painters, writers, filmmakers, and others. List of works by Stephen King is on the list. Every single writer who has enough work to have a separate article to list it all could be on this vague list. Doesn't seem to serve any point as it is now. Not sure if this navigational list can be turned into anything useful. Dream Focus 23:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:SALAT. Far too broad of a topic for a list. Ajf773 ( talk) 08:45, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Too broad for this website to handle. Mohanabhil ( talk) 14:06, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete, too broad as per WP:SALAT. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete
This would include many, many thousands of notable works by hundreds of different authors.This is a list of lists that lacks clear, specific inclusion criteria. One link took me to a list of buildings by the same architect. In principle, it could include hundreds of bibliographies and discographies, plus some filmographies for directors. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄)23:27, 10 March 2021 (UTC)23:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC) - Delete - as per WP:SALAT. Onel5969 TT me 16:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - also, article was created by a sock of Whalestate, who has now been blocked. Onel5969 TT me 16:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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 delete. Noting that CSD G5: pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, is also applicable. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 21:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
List of works by individuals
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of works by individuals ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I've been party to various "is this a meaningful list or isn't it" debates, but I reckon this takes the biscuit. WP:LISTCRUFT -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing ( talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
list of Lists-related deletion discussions.
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 18:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sure it isn't a meaningless list, the list isn't intended to be only a simple list of links, but should include the number of works to every entry, thereby allowing a comparison of lifetime production. I think my original inspiration was Wittgenstein "genius" but only published 1 book during his lifetime, compared to, for example, Picasso who was prolific. John B123, Rodw reviewed the article and didn't think it was needing deletion, so your opinion is currently in a minority (probably) of 1:3. Perhaps you'd like to refer to Chunking (psychology) "...individual pieces of an information set are broken down and then grouped together in a meaningful whole...", I couldn't think of any other meaning to "biscuit" than dog-food (with biscuits) (I don't own a dog), or biscuits (human biscuits), I don't own any either, and don't want to (sorry to be flippant) i am uniquepw ( talk) 18:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete nothing notable or defining about the entries in this list, and thus no need for it to exist. Suggest, based on history and articles under discussion, creator take a pause to learn more about Wikipedia policies before diving into creation. Courtesy pings to John B123 who are mentioned above. StarM 18:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment reading further into their cited reason for creation makes me endorse the second half of my comment. The issue is not Tolstoy v. Leo Tolstoy (as in disambiguation needed), which seems to be the
creation reason. Courtesy @
PamD:
StarM 19:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- @ Star Mississippi: "nothing notable or defining about the entries in this list, and thus no need for it to exist." the subject is " productivity" "works" ---> number of works i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- the list would be useful because by seeing numbers of works produced: for example
Wittgenstein produced 1 published philosophical work in his lifetime +
"genius" compared to
Pablo Picasso - who produced
1000's, people could identify patterns of causes to different productivity - the defining aspects are: creativity & productivity
i am uniquepw (
talk) 19:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC) correction after signature
i am uniquepw (
talk) 19:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- btw @ DoubleGrazing: Crufts < ---> WP:LISTCRUFT "biscuit" ----> sorry about your biscuit, it wasn't me honestly i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC) correction after signature i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:21, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- @ DoubleGrazing: your biscuit was taken (the guy had flees, he must have taken it and ... (had fleas) - I don't fleas, and I never have i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC) pinged after signature (the only thing I have done needing an apology, because I'm not guilty, by rights of ... my tale is true, I am not a roamer (i.e. "indiscriminate") to sniff out i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:34, 6 March 2021 (UTC) corrected error after signature ---> "done" (a do-do I don't stink, really - my work is eau de toilette, not a stinky mess) i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment reading further into their cited reason for creation makes me endorse the second half of my comment. The issue is not Tolstoy v. Leo Tolstoy (as in disambiguation needed), which seems to be the
creation reason. Courtesy @
PamD:
StarM 19:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment an AfD discussion is not really the place for the above,
Uniquepw
StarM 19:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- true i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC) change after signature i am uniquepw ( talk) 19:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- I copied the article to my sandbox, so it's possible I won't argue if others think deletion is necessary i am uniquepw ( talk) 20:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete (or merge to List of everything on Earth) per WP:SALAT: "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value". Hopelessly indiscriminate. Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- i am unique pw is moving the goalposts. How numerically prolific an individual is - something not explicitly specified as a criterion or implied in any way by the article title - is a rather meaningless statistic. As Gimli would say, the Sistine Chapel ceiling "still only counts as one" work, the same as the three-word poem " Lines on the Antiquity of Microbes". Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete so I agree the scope is too broad and decided to divide the article to list of fine art works, list of scientific writings, list of fictional writings, list of philosophical writings - based on number of works, lifetime, years active ... within my sandbox i am uniquepw ( talk) 22:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment There are a lot of Category:Works by creator. Category:Philosophical works by writer, you got list of works by painters, writers, filmmakers, and others. List of works by Stephen King is on the list. Every single writer who has enough work to have a separate article to list it all could be on this vague list. Doesn't seem to serve any point as it is now. Not sure if this navigational list can be turned into anything useful. Dream Focus 23:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:SALAT. Far too broad of a topic for a list. Ajf773 ( talk) 08:45, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Too broad for this website to handle. Mohanabhil ( talk) 14:06, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete, too broad as per WP:SALAT. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete
This would include many, many thousands of notable works by hundreds of different authors.This is a list of lists that lacks clear, specific inclusion criteria. One link took me to a list of buildings by the same architect. In principle, it could include hundreds of bibliographies and discographies, plus some filmographies for directors. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄)23:27, 10 March 2021 (UTC)23:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC) - Delete - as per WP:SALAT. Onel5969 TT me 16:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - also, article was created by a sock of Whalestate, who has now been blocked. Onel5969 TT me 16:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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.