Deletion of List of Mad Magazine issues

Comment: as an entirely reasonable subtopic split from an article on a highly notable subject. "It's a directory", "not an encyclopedia article" are very peculiar arguments to delete a list. "No other magazine has a directory like this" is ; absence of ''x'' is not justification for excluding ''y''. I view this as analogous to :Category:Bibliographies, and would definitely welcome similar lists for other highly notable publications. The notion that it is indiscriminate seems wrong; the topic is precisely defined, with no ambiguity as to inclusion criteria. I share the concern that if lists like this are accepted as notable by virtue of their parent article, this could be used to justify excessive amount of detail (i.e. List of MAD issues, 1970-1980. List of MAD issues 1980-1990 etc.), but if we restrict them to one article, which in turn is restricted by , then this concern is dissipated. The list has |problems, sure, not least the images, but there are no compelling reasons to delete it. Again like bibliographies, sourcing is not too huge of a concern; simply listing publication details doesn't require anything stronger than primary sources. In summary, this is a list of narrowly defined scope, on an encyclopedic topic closely related to a highly notable subject
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:WAX||WP:SIZE||WP:PROBLEMS)

Comment: I consider this rationale invalid, per , . If anything, you have made an argument to stub the article, not to delete it. Regards
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:PROBLEMS||WP:POTENTIAL)

Comment: for a similar reason as I gave for keeping the list of movie parodies. Notable and influential magazine; certainly notable enough to warrant a list of this nature. As I indicated in the other AFD, there are plenty of sources to confirm the accuracy of this material, starting with the magazines themselves, plus all but the last year or so's issues have been made commercially available on CD-ROM, too. Looks like a  situation to me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)