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 of the debate was keep. Ichiro 23:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of largest empires[edit]

Has potential, but appears to have been abandoned by creator, and may be prone to POV even if completed properly. Mild delete. --Nlu (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and no references to support text -Nv8200p talk 20:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Nothing wrong with it - it just needs to be completed and fixed up DrIdiot 23:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Just because something may be prone to POV disputes that doesn't mean we should delete the article, besides if it's factually based the article should speak for itself.-Deathawk 01:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Edit: Forgot to sign my name last time heh heh.Deathawk 01:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Will be useful when it is expanded, as I am confident it will be one day. CalJW 02:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep; Problematic article, because physical space is somewhat an arbitrary means of measuring an empire in the past, but if it were to be developed and with sub headings or sections going into the length of time the empire kept power, how and any other aspects of why it was a large empire, well worth keeping on ice until someone is prepared to do the work! Just a list with no work -delete! SatuSuro 03:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep if a standard for inclusion can be established. The Soviet Union should end up on this list at some point, but would everything behind the Iron Curtain be counted? Client states as far away as Cuba? Would the Japanese Empire include ocean area? --Ajdz 07:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. NeoJustin 18:25, January 7, 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Seeks to be a POV magnet and rather crufty. Stifle 00:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Abandonment by creator and potential for POV (what article doesn't?) are not good enough arguments. Turnstep 00:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete POV listcruft -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 07:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, tag for expansion, and set parameters for inclusion. Youngamerican 20:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. -- JJay 07:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep. educational, encyclopedic. needs work. Kingturtle 09:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral I, as creator of this article, have came across great difficulties in finding relevant info for this article. It still seems to me like a great idea, but I just don't know where to get the info from. I won't cry if it gets deleted (as I've reached dead end), but I'll be thrilled if someone points me as to where I could find some more info :-) Maybe WP:COTW could help... --Dijxtra 01:22, 12 January 2006 (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.