Deletion of List of celebrities with advanced degrees

Comment: I'm leaning delete. The issue here is the inclusion criteria, arguments about otability are missing the point. ''If'' we are to keep this, it first needs to be demonstrated that we can have  that are {{tq|unambiguous, objective, and supported by wikipedia:RS|reliable sources}} to allow us to make a proper list article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:LISTCRITERIA)

Comment: I voted keep earlier,  but I came about this AfD not by trawling through the log, but by actually searching out this article as a reader and seeing the AfD banner. I again point to  which reads "If users have some general idea of what they are looking for but do not know the specific terminology, they could browse the lists of basic topics and more comprehensive lists of topics, which in turn lead to most if not all of Wikipedia's lists, which in turn lead to related articles." This is a list that unambiguously helps the reader find what he is looking for - famous people with advanced degrees - and it is the average reader who will be harmed by its deletion. '''Our readers come first.''' I really don't see any -REASON|strong reasons for deletion cited above. Arguments citing notability guidelines really don't speak to navigational lists (apart from all entries having bluelinks), and the debate on inclusion criteria '''should have gone to the talk page first''' as it's a  problem
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LISTPURP||WP:DEL||WP:SURMOUNTABLE)

Comment: meets  and satisfies points 1 and 2 of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NLIST||WP:LISTPURP)

Comment: It's not clear to me that this list ''does'' meet  for navigation. With a list like List of mathematical symbols by subject, it's easy to imagine a reader who doesn't know how to find an article on the symbol they've stumbled upon any other way. This list seems to me to be a probable endpoint in itself, & to serve a function similar to the listicles it draws from, which is non-encyclopædic (, ; I think this comes close to being 'non-encyclopedic cross-categorization', tho obviously we're dealing with a list rather than a category
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LISTPURP||WP:NOTDIRECTORY||WP:INDISCRIMINATE)