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 as I'm not seeing any convincing delete votes and this AfD may not actually go to delete. There are no serious concerns with this article at this time (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 21:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of authors by name: A[edit]

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

This request also applies to 25 other articles. Indiscriminate and unmaintainable list. There're more than 38000 articles about writers. GZWDer (talk) 17:36, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – These articles fully qualify per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Writers and subcategories therein. They are also functional navigational aids per WP:LISTPURP. The lists are not indiscriminate because virtually all of the links are blue-linked to valid Wikipedia articles. The few that are redlinked can be verified with sources. Also, the lists are quite easily maintainable, as evidenced by their neat and organized state at this time. See WP:NOEFFORT regarding articles that are not being continuously worked on. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:CLN. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and request close per the arguments above. Again, like List of Islands by name, there's no good reason that pages like this should be removed only for the encyclopedia to become less convenient for the reader. Sorry to say, but this is an exception where "Indiscriminate and unmaintainable list"s like this will have to come in handy. edtiorEهեইдအီးËეεઈדוארई電子ಇអ៊ី전자ഇī😎 21:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per North America, and I would also request a quick close here. Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:43, 5 February 2016 (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.