Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of casinos

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 keep. — Aitias // discussion 14:01, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of casinos

A list of casinos, almost none of which have articles and none of which have references. Redundant to Category:Casinos and its subcategories. Guy (Help!) 23:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the category does a MUCH better job of listing the casinos, and more useful. Tavix (talk) 23:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - organised list. The red links mark articles for possible creation and a category plainly doesn't do the same job. TerriersFan (talk) 00:00, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Er, most of them aren't links at al, and it's unclear what claim to notability those which are redlinked might have. Guy (Help!) 17:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you are of course right, the list needs a good dose of cleaning up. But that is an editorial matter. But to give an example of the utility of the list I didn't realise until I saw it that Crockfords didn't have an article. Not only arguably one of the world's most prestigious casinos but one which dented the profits of it parent company[1] and Kerry Packer made the national news by suffering the biggest losses ever sustained in a casino the UK.[2] TerriersFan (talk) 23:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per TerriersFan. Lists like this can be improved greatly with sources and info, etc. Lists that include redlinks are good places for people to expand Wikipedia's content. A category and a list aren't mutually exclusive. SMSpivey (talk) 01:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Categories and lists serve different purposes, list is susceptible to fleshing out in a way the category isn't. I don't understand what the rationale for deletion is - it is just because the list isn't done yet?. Townlake (talk) 03:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sigh. Absolutely not redundant to category casinos, from: WP:Lists#Purposes of lists: "Redundancy between lists and categories is beneficial because they are synergistic, and is covered in the guideline Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates." Please, don't be a list hater. --Mr Accountable (talk) 04:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The list clearly mentions the cities the casinos are located in, thus providing information the category can't cover without going in execessive overcategorization. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Obviously the list which is now 80K should be broken up (e.g., casinos in U.S., Europe, etc.). The nutshell for WP:NOTE says there has to be mention by third party sources. There are countless websites and books which list casinos. Casinos are loaded with various political, religious, and social issues not to mention the entertainment issues. I've started writing some of the red links and once you start digging, it's amazing what you find. Americasroof (talk) 20:15, 12 February 2009 (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.