Talk:List of Golden Globe winners

This article was nominated for deletion on 7 August 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Film awards task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Untitled

I am adding links to and from the main article. I do not think more links are needed. This is a most useful page for the Golden Globe Award series. Also I added a category. I will remove the template and the orphaned categaory, if I don't get any response in the next days. Hoverfish 20:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a well-built, to-the-point page with legitimate factual info. So why does IanManka want to sign its death warrant? 3 times recently he (and only he) has marked it for deletion, and each time the other Wikipedia users disagree. Not to mention the fact that far more users seem to contribute to this page than want it deleted.

I checked the rules about what categorizes a page as "list cruft", and the Golden Globe Winner page does NOT fall into that category. A page dedicated to, say, which residents of Middle Earth had ever had possession of the Ring, would be a TRUE example of "list cruft"-- which are basically lists for the sake of making lists that appeal to a very narrow cross section of fans of that particular topic.

I suppose the Academy Awards pages are list cruft too?

Or how about this one:List_of_black_Academy_Award_winners_and_nominees. Would he make such a page AfD as well??

I am not even a contributor to this page, but I dislike seeing things unjustly deleted. Sure, this page could be even better, but it's far from useless. Could this info be found elsewhere on the Web? OF COURSE. So could EVERYTHING ELSE ON WIKIPEDIA. The point is that Wikipedia makes these things concise and easily searchable. Woodson 15:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I screwed up. I admit it. I regret calling this list listcruft. I can't believe I prodded this twice (against policy -- I can't believe I forgot that I had prodded it for deletion and the tag had already been removed). What amazes me is the fact that I'm being berated despite the fact that the article was never even close to being deleted! Each and every time, users vouched to keep this article. Since that was consensus, I agree with it. I shut up when consensus doesn't agree with my opinion, I re-evaluate my original reasoning, and reflect.

However, I still stand by my opinion that this list is improperly titled. If an article is named List of Golden Globe winners, then I expect to see all winners listed here, not just the categories that someone arbitrarily decided to call a decisive list. This, by no means, is a decisive list. I suggest that links be added to the various articles which list winners of Golden Globes. However, not wanting to anger anyone else, I'll refrain from making these changes. Hopefully, I've addressed all statements by Moose Boy. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]