Deletion of Rankings of retirement destinations in the United States

Comment: Wikipedia is not the place to recreate content more suited to entries in hotel or culinary guides, travelogues, and the like" from , which is exactly what this is
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTTRAVELGUIDE)

Comment: Good to see some input on whether to keep or delete this article, although comments thus far on whether the article can be edited and kept are missing. / have been mentioned; the article is ''not a travel guide'' and does not fit within the parameters of the policy at this time of what WP is not. The article's subject and focus is on the topic of rankings of retirement destinations rather than a list of the top places to retire. The distinction is important, as a list of the best places to retire is a travel guide, while the topic of ranking of the best places to retire is not. The same would be true for best vacation destinations; a list would be a travel guide, while the topic of ranking of the best vacation destinations would not. The article includes a list of places as examples, clearly cited, to illustrate the topic rather than ranking places best to worst which may be considered a guide. As for , there are no arguments of A + B = C. If there is, please state a specific example. While the information has been gathered, sources have been clearly cited so the article does not fall in . If there is a specific example of original research, please state so. The article has been written from a neutral point of view with the five pillars of WP, something refreshing for a topic usually covered only by the media and advertisers. This is what WP is about. Cheers
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIRECTORY||WP:NOTGUIDE||WP:SYNTHESIS||WP:OR)

Comment: This list article fulfills all requirements for inclusion in the encyclopedia as a list article. The article does not fit in the paramenters of  of what WP is not. One could argue no article is necessary for inclusion on WP because you can always find information elsewhere - so this argument for deletion is null. The editors of this article have done a fine job of editing to bring together information in one place which can be independantly verified
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE)

Comment: abstract concept - ranking by what measure? It's simply a list of cities in alphabetic order, with no additional data, so it's additionally unclear what the ranking criteria authors are using, but even if it were, it is too subjective. It appears this list was culled from different rankings already published, so it's  on top of it. I can't think of any lists that contain just rankings or "best of" without solid criteria or sourcing (eg AFI's Top 100; list of places by population). Agree with nom - this is fit for a Forbes slideshow, not an encyclopedia. (Also "best places to retire in the US" is NOT an Idiomatic expression
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: though I don't think INDISCRIMINATE is the right rationale. I find this to be more a case of  or, more strongly, . It also seems to involve quite a bit of . I agree with JayJay's comparison of this article to a "ranking of vacation destinations" or "ranking of best places to live", topics which clearly fall outside of Wikipedia's scope. Just because you can pull together a list of something from various sources doesn't mean that it adds up to an appropriate topic for a Wikipedia article. While it's certainly appropriate, in an article about a city, to mention that the city has been ranked by some notable source (''Forbes'', say) as one of the best places to retire, it's not appropriate to pull together lists from various sources and stitch them together into some overall ranking of retirement destinations. That's the part that reeks of original research and synthesis, and why I believe this isn't appropriate content for Wikipedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIRECTORY||WP:NOTGUIDE||WP:SYNTHESIS)