Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of professional tennis players from India

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 without prejudice. Content will be provided on request. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 21:45, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of professional tennis players from India

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

We have a category for this. Why do we need a list. Who would be interested in this. India are not a superpower of tennis. Not interesting or notable to a lot of people. List cruft imo KnowIG (talk) 09:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "We have a category" is usually one of the weakest arguments against having a list, and often ends up with even bad lists being kept simply because the subject is notable enough for a category. I see a lot of
WP:IDONTLIKEIT here, and truth be told, I don't like it either. I think it will be impractical to maintain a list of where professional players from India rank currently (this info was apparently derived from a list of world rankings so far). Generally, I see no reason to list tennis players by nationality, since the focus is on the individual rather than where they're from. Do people root for or against Rafael Nadal because of his nationality? Mandsford 13:55, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
- The question is - Does a tennis player coming from India get any special coverage that a tennis player coming from anywhere else in the world wouldn't? The list doesn't seem to be List of Indian tennis players. Bulldog123 00:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The list is currently in poor shape, but given the great number of entries in
WP:CLN it's justified as an alternate mode of article navigation and organization in addition to a category. Further, the subdivision of the category into subcategories provides an additional reason for a list, as the list can maintain all entries on one page. Plus lists can annotate, sort by means other than alphabetical, etc., etc., etc. I agree with Mandsford that the deletion nom seems to just be a list of IDONTLIKEIT examples, pretty much expressly dismissive and scornful of the topic. postdlf (talk) 16:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete. While the topic is a legitimate one for a list, the article as currently written is poorly formatted and organized. Furthermore, no improvements have been made since the AfD period began, indicating a lack of interest in improving this particular article. This deletion should be without prejudice to re-creation of a better list. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It would take a complete rewrite, so I wouldn't oppose delete without prejudice to recreation. postdlf (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I too think the topic is legitimate. But since this is in such a poor shape, that a category can do a better job here. So, I don't see why this needs to exist.—Chris!_c/t 22:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Topic barely legitimate -- only insofar as being "interesting" to a select few. As nom stated, there doesn't seem to be a relevant article-worthy connection between India and tennis and so the list feels entirely indiscriminate. Bulldog123 00:02, 6 April 2011 (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.