Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Soviet and Russian leaders by height

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. Punkmorten (talk) 07:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Soviet and Russian leaders by height

This list is the epitome of trivia. It collects a number of factoids that have no significance whatsoever to the historical significance of the subjects. What does it matter that Yeltsin was 8 cms taller than Andropov? The height of Soviet and Russian leader warrants only a very brief mention in each individual article. Nothing more, nothing less. This is interesting stuff to put in someone's userspace, but doesn't belong in the mainspace. A ecis^Brievenbus 23:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unverifiable trivia, serves no real purpose. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 00:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unreferenced, and what possible use could this article serve? Am I being U.S.-centric? Is this a cultural factor in Russia? JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 00:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unreferenced trivia just about sums it up. ukexpat (talk) 00:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The Guiness Wiki Book of world records? Non-notable. Renee (talk) 01:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom as an indiscriminate list of info Bfigura ^(talk) 02:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Aside from the fact it's completely unsourced and likely unverifiable, what possible use could this have? 23skidoo (talk) 13:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete: OMFG. I suppose someone could come up with a List of Seychellois government ministers by hip measurement, but short of that, this definitely is the non-notable winner of the month. I'm not sure what is scarier; that this article survived for a year before AfD or that from the creator's history (he's sure as heck no SPA) it's a good faith effort. RGTraynor 13:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Trivia that cannot be used in an encyclopedia as it is completely unreferenced. No significance. Razorflame (talk) 14:11, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Trivially trivial trivia Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 15:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:TRIVIA is a style guideline, not a content guideline. This article is clearly unencyclopedia, but please use appropriate guidelines to support your nomination. --Nick Penguin_(contribs) 21:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okaythen, it's unencyclopedic and irrelevant (just what does height have to do with anything)? Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 14:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ROFL, er Delete. Completely unencyclopaedic, non-notable and irrelevant list of info. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 03:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wikipedia:Lists (discriminate, verfiable, and organized). Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I created this unreferenced page as I read a very detailed article on Wikipedia concerning the heights of US Presidents. I thought it would be a good idea to the same thing for Russia but I should have added the relevant links. The problem is that they were scattered all over the internet (as well as offline sources such as the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper). If anyone knows a good source which contains all the relevant data I would be glad to correct the article if necessary. Otherwise, I would have to agree that the best option is to delete my article.Abc85 (talk) 18:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete height is too arbitrary a criteria for a list.-- danntm ^T _C 19:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Trivia. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I hate to peddle otherstuffexists, but there is literally an article of the US presidents by height. It is the same exact article for another country. If this (the russian) article can be brought up to speed with sources (online or otherwise), then it deserves to be kept, just as the Us president list does. Remember, just because it is another country than a good percentage of the english speakers here doesn't make it funny or trivial. Protonk (talk) 04:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The article about US presidents demonstrates that the idea of height has played a significant role in scientific and historical studies. See the sections "The taller man wins?", "Further reading" and "References". There is no indication whatsoever that this is the case for Russia. The only factoid about Russian leaders that has received some attention is their hair: Alexander III was bald, Nicholas II had hair, Lenin was bald, Stalin had hair, Khrushchev was bald, Brezhnev had hair, Andropov was bold, Chernenko had hair, Gorbachev was bald, Yeltsin had hair, Putin is more or less bald, Medvedev has hair. Aecis^Brievenbus 11:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Only part of that article demonstrates that. sure, some of the notability comes from the published papers attempting to correlate electoral success with height, but we would not make an article about a published paper like that in a vacuum (say, if the paper were a study of shoe salesmen by height). In this case I don't think we can make an argument that listing russian leaders by height is trivia while listing american leaders by height is encyclopedic. I understand that is not the only difference between the two articles but it is the primary difference. So lets give it a chance, tag it for work to be done by the appropriate project and move on. Protonk (talk) 16:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The list may be discriminate but this is just loosely associated trivia. If you want this kept you need to assert that this connection is notable. The list of US presidents by height isn't much better but at least there is an assertion of notability even if the connection between height and being president is fringe. EconomicsGuy (talk) 06:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While the title made me smile, in a Monty Python kind of way, the list seems to be an arbitrary synthesis of otherwise unrelated criteria. Now, if a respected academic source were to publish a study of "height of Soviet/Russian leaders", we might get a good article out of it. But that is not happening here. ETA: I'm not a racist! My cat is black! Learning that there's a similar article about US presidents also made me smile, but less so, because I'd already read a piece (by Scott Adams of all people) discussing this very issue: he says that US presidents tend to be taller (or have better hair). And that's the difference: reliable sources have discussed that subject. This is original research by synthesis. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 20:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Trivia. KleenupKrew (talk) 10:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, source and improve. It is often claimed that certain Russian political leaders felt a complex of inferiority because of their small height, which led to repressions. They requested to make their photos with other people of higher height is such manner to look higher than all others. This list can be salvaged if put in a proper context and sourced.Biophys (talk) 20:17, 20 April 2008 (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.