Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hogwarts school roll

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 as Pottercruft per WP:SNOW. And it is (well, was) visually wanting, shall we say. Daniel Case 02:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hogwarts school roll[edit]

I think the introduction says it all. Incomplete listcruft, and WP:OR. Notable students are already listed elsewhere (in the House lists). PageantUpdater • talk • contribs • 11:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not only incomplete - empty. Pottercruft. Lankiveil 12:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Delete per nom. Hogwarts characters are adequately covered elsewhere. Shalom ^Hello 12:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Utter listcruft. Regardless of the couple of paragraphs at the beginning, the fact that the lists themselves are empty makes a reasonable case for deletion under WP:CSD A3.. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Harry's year is easy, but the years either side are much harder to find details for. As it is now, I agree it's pure duplication of Students in Harry Potter's Year, with a touch of List of characters in the Harry Potter books#students (although I do like my table syntax more than either of theirs). I've copied into my namespace, so I'm ambivalent as to whether this is deleted. It'll be back when it's complete, useful and unique. Oh, BTW, OR has gone from this page (IMHO), but you might want to chase it into Students in Harry Potter's year if you're keen. Happy-melon 15:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fictional topic with no real world coverage - Maybe transwiki somewhere? Corpx 17:15, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Slavlin 17:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We have separate articles on the students in Harry's year? Ye gods. Delete this as redundant to those, and someone send me some new retinas, something about the colour scheme in that table made mine go all funny... Tony Fox (arf!) review? 20:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and delete now. Ridiculous. Natalie 21:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This list is found in somewhat similar fashion in the Hogwarts article, so this is just a duplication for the most part.--JForget 23:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A redundant list of characters, plus it's HIDEOUSLY UGLY. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:39, 24 July 2007 (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.