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 no consensus. After two weeks, all we have is a bunch of squabbling, and no real discussion of the merits of the list. Relisting it for another weeks seem pointless. If people want to redirect this, discuss that on the talk page. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of Tamil-language media[edit]

Lists of Tamil-language media (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Listcruft.. i don't see any good reason why such a list is worthwhile. Saqib (talk) 08:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:20, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:20, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- First of all, nom offers no valid reason for deletion. WP:LISTCRUFT is an essay, and a rather poorly argued essay at that. Furthermore, the essay has only to do with primary level lists. Here we're dealing with a list of lists. The appropriate guideline, which is policy rather than essay, is WP:LISTN, which states pretty clearly that "Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability." Obviously there aren't going to be sources on "Lists of Tamil Language Media," but this list is a useful navigational aid and should be kept. Nom should consider withdrawing ill-formed AfD, given that there's no valid reason for deletion given. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:17, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note The IP address is suspected of socking and an investigation is under way at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Unscintillating. Furthermore, it is suspected that a XFD topic banned user is behind this IP per Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#IP_possibly_being_used_by_topic_banned_user_to_get_round_ban. --Saqib (talk) 15:05, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note -- Saqib is Poisoning the well because they can't make policy-based arguments for their positions. I would say that accusing me of misbehavior on the basis of a still-open ANI report that no one objective is taking seriously is pretty much a personal attack. If I weren't categorically opposed to reporting people to ANI I'd certainly think about reporting you. Why don't you respond to my arguments and quit attacking me? 192.160.216.52 (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With respect I not making any personal attack on you other to point out that you have been suspected of socking. Concerning this list, WP is an encyclopedia and therefore I think this list doesn't belong anywhere here. I'm afraid if we're going to keep such lists then a vast number of things can be turned into lists. What would be next ? Lists of Hindi-language media, Lists of Urdu-language media, Lists of Bengali-language media, Lists of Telugu-language media, Lists of Marathi-language media. ? Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information nor a directory. --Saqib (talk) 17:25, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Right. You're not attacking me. You're just stating a fact when you say that there's an open SPI on me and the fact that you completely neglected to mention that it's been open forever and has gained no traction whatsoever was what? An oversight? Get for real. Now, your argument in that comment is bankrupt. First of all, each article is judged on its own notability. Whether or not this one is kept isn't going to affect how your other hypotheticals turn out. Second, this is not an indiscriminate collection of information, it's a list of lists. We have policy, cited by me and unaddressed by you, that explains why this kind of thing is notable. Second, it's not a directory. If you read the policy you're hinting at there you failed to understand it. Really, at this point the only decent thing to do is to withdraw the nomination as, even after all this talk, you have still failed to propound valid reasons for deletion. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 17:32, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If it make sense, we can merge and Redirect this to Media in Chennai. What do you say? --Saqib (talk) 11:15, 21 April 2018 (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.