Deletion of List of countries by length of coastline (2nd nomination)

Comment: keep votes at last AfD were mostly some version of , furthermore the article even states that the figures are not comparable. As such we really should not be having an article comparing them
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USEFUL)

Comment: as an arbitrary collection of #INFO|random information, whose actual values are not really determinable. Note that List of countries by coast/area ratio is derived from the same source and should perhaps be bundled in this discussion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: the list itself provides the most excellent reason for getting rid of this |indiscriminate collection of non-information: ''Since the scales at which the CIA World Factbook figures were measured is not stated, they cannot be relied upon even as a guide
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE)

Comment: Arguing the methodology of sourcing is a valid and noble pursuit, but it belongs on a talk page. The nominator rightly shows that the "length" of a coastline is dependent upon the scale of measure but that isn't a rationale to delete the page. Unless we presume that the ranking itself is original research (and I don't see that claim advanced or supported), we don't have a compelling reason to delete the page. I would submit that turning an alphabetized list into an ordinal list by some feature is well within the sphere of "naive operations" permitted by . Keep this article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)