Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural icons of the Netherlands

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010(talk) 22:38, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of cultural icons of the Netherlands

List of cultural icons of the Netherlands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The discussion in

talk) 00:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Such lists by country are highly encyclopedic, if reliable sources exist which say "X, Y, and Z" are cultural icons of Country A". If you see a dubious or unreferenced entry tag it as needing a citation, or just be bold and delete it if you search and cannot find reliable sourcing for it. Not Italy, but has Rembrandt . Edison (talk) 01:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – I left remarks at the initial discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural icons of Poland which I would like to fully apply here as well. I note that this particular list promises "encyclopedic" connections among M.C. Escher, Pieter Hooft, and the Friesian Holstein. SteveStrummer (talk) 05:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think an overall decision should be made whether this kind of lists are desirable, personally, I am not convinced. Many sources will be contradictory, I expect. The present list here is incredible, couldn't believe my eyes when I was going through it. I mean, Roosendaal, a "cultural icon"? The prime minister??? Jan Peter Balkenende??? If kept, 90% of this list should be nuked. The monarchy may be part of Dutch culture (albeit a recent addition, given its republican history), but the current king or his aunt certainly are not. One of the worst examples of idiosyncratic listcruft that I have seen in a long time. --Randykitty (talk) 08:52, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A list contains some entries which are dubious? Then they should be removed, leaving those which have references saying the are the country's cultural icons or equivalent language. Deletion is not a substitute for editing. Edison (talk) 02:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Not "some"... I hardly see entries that are not dubious... --Randykitty (talk) 09:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Valid sources exist and the list is encyclopedic. All of the issues that have been raised about this article can be addressed through editing, so deletion is not necessary. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:31, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Davey2010(talk) 12:48, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep – Encyclopedic article with valid sourcing. No reason to delete. United States Man (talk) 20:31, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Despite claims to the contrary, I don't see any reliable sources. Current list is completely idiosyncratic and haphazard and probably cannot ever be anything else either. --Randykitty (talk) 20:52, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Davey2010(talk) 09:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There was a lengthy debate on this topic at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural icons of England: the nomination included several similar articles, including this one. The consensus seemed to be that the topic was notable, but that the article were only viable if strict inclusion criteria were set. As it stands, this article has some very dubious entries (Douwe Egberts coffee?? Han van Meegeren???!?).TheLongTone (talk) 20:41, 26 July 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.