Talk:List of people from Iași

[Untitled]

Iaşi is a large city in Romania - as proven by the number of people of the list (many are still red links, but that's because Romanian topics on wikipedia are not treated as in depth as they should - all of the entries on the list are in conformity with a Romanian encyclopaedia). Many more relevant entries will be added to the list, as I and others bump into them.

We currently have a List of Bucharesters to match, and the category to match this list.

To propose that this is "a listcruft" is amazingly arrogant - if the reason behind it is "x user has not heard of Iaşi", then I urge that user to get informed on the topic. Iaşi has 300,000 inhabitants and a 500 years history - for 300 of the 500 years, it was the capital of an independent state. Dahn 22:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

The reason I proposed this is that it fails WP:NOT; Wikipedia is not simply a collection of items. If this list were contained within a larger article about the town, as in many other cities, then it would make sense. And with the same logic, the List of Bucharesters article you mention should be nominated for deletion as well. --Mhking 22:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

No, both lists should stay, and please confine your criticism of both here - at least for now. I have no idea where you came up with the guideline - both lists are linked in their respective articles, and the respective articles are linked on the lists; they are also included in categories. The supposed criterion you mention does not seem to apply with, off the top of my head: List of people from New York City, List of French Jews, List of people from Manchester, New Hampshire, or List of classical music composers. What I have tried to avoid here was precisely the artificial swelling of articles such as Bucharest and Iaşi - one is huge, and the other, if more attention would be paid to it, will get very large. Both lists have been part of the city articles, but both have been removed due precisely to their very likely uncontrolled expansion in the future. Now, what was your point? Dahn 22:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me add that, even if you disagree with the criteria, this does not belong in Speedy Delete - it is not in agreement with any of the characteristics required by the latter. If you want to debate this, you could use normal CfD - although it looks to me that you are proposing a change in policy, in which case there are other places to discuss this. Dahn 23:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Fine. But I'd suggest that this needs to be addressed in terms of the rationale of WP:NOT (as do those other lists you mentioned) in the long run. I'll leave it be at this point; I truly did mean well. --Mhking 23:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion was created for non-controversial deletions and that's why it has very clear criteria. This list can't be deleted using any of those criteria. If you think that this list should not exist, try using the AfD, not speedy deletion. bogdan 23:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

On deletion

In the list is not just Bujor or Vogoride I don't know anything about. I couldn't find anything about the family Schwarzfeld. Or what is special about Sorel Etrog, Samuel Leibowitz and others in that list, most of them with red links and no info on internet about them. I still think they should be removed.cristi 15:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't think that I want you to remove Bujor or Vogoride. cristi 15:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I don't think this is the place to discuss anything about those articles that already exist (btw, if you think that a person like Sorel Etrog, decorated with the Order of Canada, is "not notable", I expect you to win the Order of Canada and we'll talk some more then; if you think that Samuel Leibowitz is not notable, I'd like to see you seated on the defense team in some major lawsuits in the US, and we'll talk some more after you prove that it is easy). If we confine this discussion to people who are red links, I was hoping you would get the full scope of my argument on the other page: what goes for Bujor goes for all those people, and I think you have already proven yourself not to be the standard after which we judge people who are or are not notable. I do not know what sort of Internet you are using, but they do show up on mine. Dahn 16:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

That's painfully obvious by now. Sorry for the inconvenience. cristi 07:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

"Residents" list

Is there any reason for a "residents" sub-list? It seems rather superfluous in light of the fact that to be from a place (the list's basic inclusion criteria), you were at one time a resident there.  Mbinebri  ^{talk ←} 01:02, 5 March 2010 (UTC)