Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of actors who played Marines in movies

List of actors who played Marines in movies

What's next? List of actresses who played prostitutes in movies? Julia Roberts! Sure, Marine is a respectable profession but so is police officer. That list is a joke too. ...And Beyond! 04:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As WP:NOT says, "Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed." wikipediatrix 04:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep relates information that a catagory cannot, and interestingly informative. Entries appear to check out, so my references rule is met. I can't see any other way to compile this information, hence keep. LinaMishima 04:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it need to be compiled in the first place? "Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed." wikipediatrix 04:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The best way to compile this information is by category. The other aspect of this "article" contrary to WP:NOT is that it's an indescriminate collection of information and trivia. It also does not support any existing article, nor does there need to be an article on actors who played marines in movies. If this is deleted, the redirect List of actors who played Marines at movies should be deleted as well. Agent 86 04:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- comment you said The best way to compile this information is by category, however this is a prime example of a list that cannot currently be duplicated as a catagory - as all the actors have references to their film appearances as marines next to them. Also, WP:NOT 'indescriminate collection' does not state anything about collecting information relating people into a format for easier exploration. LinaMishima 04:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete perfect example of indiscriminate collection of information. Don't bother categorizing either. Opabinia regalis 04:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OR. -- Koffieyahoo 04:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- comment this would not be OR if a catagory was possible, as the appearances are all referenced, as far as I can tell. LinaMishima 04:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - comment I don't see how this is referenced. No independent sources are cited. -- Koffieyahoo 04:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as indiscriminate collection of information, categorisation would be OK. Sandstein 04:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]