A list of an organization's products or services when no attempt is made to explain their significance.
Things that should really be somewhere else.
Subarticles
Basically, articles lacking in independent content, for example, a not-really-prominent guild in
World of Warcraft can't really be mentioned separately from the game, can it?
Subject A is notability-dependent on subject B if: B not notable implies A not notable.
I vote merge in this situation.
Lists with no objective criteria
Lists that are too short
"How short?"
Whatever I feel it should be at the time.
Unsourced articles
Old Rules
My goal as a voter is to develop a set of clear, consistent policies based partly on Wikipedia guidelines and partly on common sense, while being fully compliant with Wikipedia official policy.
I like (tend to vote to keep):
Articles that, by definition, violate some aspect of
WP:NOT, but are making significant forward progress toward nonviolation.
Locally famous things on the internet that have little or no global notability. This is in contrast with the real life version above because the vastness and anonymity of the internet enable spurious connections with notable things.