Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who have been pied (5th nomination)

List of people who have been pied

AfDs for this article:

[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)

This is an indiscriminate, crufty list of people who have been pied over the years that has gone to AfD several times, the last discussion being over a decade ago. A good deal of keep arguments then focused on the article having "reliable sources" or being "verifiable". I don't think this applies to the article in a modern context; a good deal of the sources are primary and dead, or otherwise unreliable/not counting towards notability. Most of the examples are people being pied in some video, and then the video being the source. There are a few "pieings" of notable people that have gotten attention and sustained overage over the years; these instances can be mentioned in the main Pieing article. Finally, I think there are BLP considerations here that encourage against maintaining a list of people who have had a goofy object thrown at their face. Thank you, Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 02:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Food and drink, Entertainment, and Popular culture. Skynxnex (talk) 02:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Duplication of Pieing - same subject, same author. The list was created two days after the article was written. I see no purpose in creating a stand-alone table, but I see the article having the same BLP issues, especially in the "Convicted" section. — Maile (talk) 03:16, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and remove any entries that rely on primary sources to avoid aforementioned BLP issues. Indeed, covering only pieings mentioned in a secondary source will improve the value of the list anyways. —siro χ o 07:55, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and remove unreliable or dead sources. It seems like the living people requirement would only apply to unreliable sources, not the entire list.

Chamaemelum (talk) 08:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Can someone show me sources that show this meets WP:LISTN? Otherwise I'd support merge with pieing.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a distinguishing characteristic. Whether an event is covered in secondary sources still doesn't bring this sort of minor activity to be something needing to be catalogued in an encyclopedia – notable people do a lot of different things but this isn't even mentioned in most of their own biographies. Fails LISTN and NOT#IINFO. Pieing already covers significant instances with their purposes, don't think this needs to be merged there. Reywas92^Talk 13:25, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:LISTN --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 13:35, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]