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. --Coredesat 03:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum by closing admin: This has been userfied to User:TravisTX/Workshop/List of schools in India. --Coredesat 04:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is clearly listcruft. Having Category:Schools in India is more than enough. Thus this article is completely redundant as well. --Siva1979Talk to me 15:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. —Travistalk 23:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are cases where lists are useful adjuncts to articles - where they provide additional, often comparative sources of information (List of districts of India, would be a good example). This is not one of those lists. Delete per WP:NOT a directory. -- MarcoTolo 23:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep The red links encourage the creation of missing articles, addressing Wikipedia's systemic bias against developing countries. Mowsbury 22:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Strong Keep should be reserved for extreme cases, pointing to a few useful redlinks while completely ignoring all of the convincing arguments isn't even reason enough for a weak keep. Malc82 23:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There aren't any convincing delete arguments, delete votes are mostly just playground namecalling. Kappa
Keep, WP:BIAS--we have lists of schools in regions of the U.S. If the list is too long, then it should be split up, not deleted. Also for the umpteenth time, categories only track articles that exist, lists track articles that do and do not exist. Dhaluza 22:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is generally considered an argument to avoid - after a quick look at the entries under List of schools by country, I suspect a bunch of those qualify for AfD consideration as well. -- MarcoTolo 23:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am aware of that, but the argument was related to WP:BIAS which invites comparison. Dhaluza 23:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
comment-maybe a category for such schools might be more useful than a list for a nation of a billion? Chris 01:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes eventually it will need to be split but I think it's too early to start a list of schools in Assam when it would only have 2-3 members. Kappa 03:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The systemic bias argument is a strong one. This list will help in the development of articles in an area which is under-covered by Wikipedia. A category can not do this. The potential length of the article is a red herring. As the list grows, the article can be split. A closer look at the US link on List of schools by country will reveal that it links to Education in the United States which contains a link to Lists of school districts in the United States, which in turn contains links to lists such as List of school districts in Oklahoma. The individual school districts contain links to notable school articles. Note that is not an OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument but an analogy of how lists can grow and be managed. Dsmdgold 12:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've read the WP:BIAS arguments and I disagree. Personally, I'd say delete to [[List of Schools in the United States]] or [[List of Schools in North America]] as well. This list is nearly 900 lines long as it is and I, for one, can't see how it can be reasonably managed. Given the size of India, this list very well may be longer than [[List of Schools in English-Speaking Countries]]. If the list were split per your example above, it would much more keep-worthy. —Travistalk 15:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The point is of the Bias arguments is that we have fairly full potential coverage of school districts in the United States because the mostly US editors here have worked out the scheme above. Our much fewer number of Indian editors have not had the time to work out the more mature scheme outlined above. If we delete this list now, then we will make largely inaccessible a great deal of work. At one time, the scheme for the US looked like this. We should give these editors the chance to let this list mature into a better scheme. Dsmdgold 15:06, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I copied the whole list to my user space and have started breaking into separate lists by state. —Travistalk 00:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While my vote is borderline, I do not see a need to delete this. Please see the guideline at Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes which states these three methods of organization are not in competition with the other. Categories should not replace lists or vice versa except for special circumstances, of which this is not. This article has obviously had a lot of work put into it and the rationale is much too weak to just delete it all. That the list may never be complete, the same could be said for the category also.(Mind meal 22:06, 25 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]
That's one reasoning, but what about "WP is not a directory" (of schools in India) ? Corpx 01:53, 26 July 2007 (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.