Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of oldest living Academy Award winners and nominees

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of oldest living Academy Award winners and nominees[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)

Trivial cross-categorisation ("age/age at death" and "Academy Award winner/nominee") which is also statistical trivia. Unsourced WP:OR. The article is a deeply confusing series of tables and chronologies of the oldest and earliest living winners or nominees of "Academy Award X", and is a trivia bonanza.

Similar to five recently deleted articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Academy Award for Best Actress winners by age (2nd nomination). Newshunter12 (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Newshunter12 (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It might be a reasonable cross-categorization if the list reported the ages at which the people were nominated or won, but it's based on their current age. Longevity and film-making are unrelated topics, and this is clearly a non-encyclopedic cross-categorization. I'm sure a lot of work went into this, but it's not notable and probably original research. pburka (talk) 17:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Another one of the interminable "oldest/youngest" lists that are being pruned. Oldest/youngest at the time of winning is the only notable criterion. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:07, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, just yet another list of meaningless gerontology trivia and WP:OR. Dronebogus (talk) 00:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I believe there has been enough precedent set to delete these kind of lists. Fails WP:LISTN with big WP:V and WP:BLP issues. Vladimir.copic (talk) 23:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:FANCRUFT, WP:TRIVIA. Platonk (talk) 03:59, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Topic also seems to fail LISTN as the only sources are 'top 10' listicles. Avilich (talk) 16:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – per the nominator. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:07, 25 October 2021 (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.