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 delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of people on the postage stamps of Chad[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:LISTN. Even the 1960s part, which looks filled, is very incomplete (e.g. the long series of Mexico 68 gold medal winners is lacking, and the many people on airmail stamps from the period). Largely abandoned since its creation in 2007, except some minor additions in 2013. Not of interest to our readers either, judging from the pageviews. Fram (talk) 08:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Africa. Fram (talk) 08:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. After all these "list of people on the postage stamps of X" deletion discussions, no one has stepped forth to prove why this is a topic worth covering. While they can be sourced to a stamp catalogue, that doesn't mean they should be if there is no proof of the underlying topic's notability. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This is something for another kind of project, outside of Wikipedia. BD2412 T 21:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Why has Chad not put any person on their postage stamps for 39 years? Part of me doubts that is the case, and if not this inaccurate list has stood way too long. I have never seen any argument as to why these lists meet our inclusion criteria. Just because you can find a list somewhere that someone else made does not mean the list can be recreated in Wikipedia. Wikia is a good medium to recreat such lists, Wikipedia has actual notability requirements and parameters on lists that a list like this does not meet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:09, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence whatsoever exists that this meets WP:NLIST, as already stated: not in this AfD, and not in the article. Otherwise, this and all similar pages fail WP:NOTDIRECTORY (as generally "Simple listings without contextual information showing encyclopedic merit."); and furthermore, because having this is definitively a WP:BADIDEA (as evidenced by the fact people keep citing the existence of these lists as a reason to keep having them even when they fail inclusion criteria), as Wikipedia is not a philatelical catalogue and there is no indication how this kind of page is of any broader encyclopedic significance. An encyclopedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, even if it is true, and despite it possibly being interesting to a limited number of dedicated philatelical enthusiasts. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:50, 3 June 2022 (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.