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.
I question the value of having a separate list of billionaires based on their sexual orientation. This might be more appropriate as a category in the
Category:LGBT people by occupation category structure.
LizRead!Talk! 14:44, 17 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep - The list seems to meet
WP:LISTN based on several sources
[1][2][3][4][5][6] and the individual entries are all notable. The sortable table in the article is especially informative.-
MrX 15:04, 17 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep per above - Well we already have one on race and nationality so to a point I think to be consistent we should have on on sexual orientation ... It sounds alot less stupid in my head!
. –
Davey2010Talk 15:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete. Most of the stuff is useful, but a list of every living billioaire isn't,
In My Opinion.
AoorwHead (
talk) 20:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep It's implicitly interesting. And an extremely valuable reference for those who work in philanthropy! ;-)
121.220.68.168 (
talk) 08:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep and rename to reflect it being a list - Precedent only goes so far, and whether it's useful (or not) is irrelevant to AfD (see
WP:USEFUL). What matters is that it's an appropriate and notable topic for a list as per the sources found by
MrX. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 14:03, 19 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep and rename as list per above. That said, my primary rationale is that OTHERSTUFF exists, so if we have lists of foo billionaires of various sorts, this one is also acceptable.
Montanabw(talk) 03:48, 21 October 2015 (UTC)reply