Deletion of List of fictional Scots

Comment: The portrayal of Scots in fiction may be notable, but that isn't what this article is about. Portrayal of Scots in fiction is a totally different topic than List of fictional Scots This article is specifically about ''the list'' of fictional Scots and not the more general subject of how Scots are portrayed in fiction.  The argument that this list should be kept due to  misses the fact that we have different guidelines for what is a proper list and a proper cateogory, and these guidelines don't synch up perfectly.  There are many, many categories on Wikipedia that are not proper topics for lists, because we have guidelines such as  and  that limit the focus of our list articles to topics of the right breadth.  So while extraordinarily broad lists are disallowed we allow categories similar in scope. Unlike list articles, categories are meant to function as a directory.   should be rewritten to include this as it is being misused to keep all sorts unencyclopedic lists
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates (WP:CLN||WP:SALAT||WP:NOTDIR||WP:CLN)

Comment: The relevant guideline, , tells us that there is no preference for categories over lists as they each have their good points and so complement each other.  Size is not a significant issue because |Wikipedia is not paper.  The list is nowhere near the size of our larger lists such as List of minor planets which, with its numerous sublists, has about 250000 entries.  Furthermore, the list before us here contains good sources which reference the notable topic of Scots in fiction.  Provision of such sources is one of the advantages which lists have over categories and so our core policy of |verification is better served.  Removal of sourced information is not our |editing policy and the nomination is purely negative, contrary to this policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates (WP:CLS||WP:NOT||WP:V||WP:PRESERVE)