Deletion of List of English Defence League demonstrations

Comment: per  (especially point 3) and . Wikipedia isn't here to list information, regardless of whether or not it's true, when it's not encyclopaedic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:IINFO||WP:DISCRIMINATE)

Comment: to English Defence League. Content is directly related to the subject of the English Defence League article. A list of events would be appropriate to that article, and perhaps should be made into a collapsed table, as not to give it |undue weight within the article. English Defence League does not meet  so no sub-articles are required at this time
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE||WP:LIMIT)

Comment: I was going to type almost exactly what Diego did. Those delete !votes arguing "indiscriminate" seem to understand "indiscriminate" to mean something like "random", "unusual", "just any old information" rather than the ''technical'' definition it has on WP. The article clearly is not indiscriminate in the WP sense - not just because there are clear inclusion criteria as Diego points out, but I would also argue since the number of EDL demonstrations is finite and each individual demonstration is well-documented in reliable sources, a comprehensive, objective and discriminate list is possible. A good way of understanding  as it applies to this article - ''if there had been only five demonstrations in the history of the EDL, would a cut-down version of this list have belonged in their article''? The answer is clearly "yes". This (a) confirms that ''the content of this article is encyclopedic'' (even if the topic title might not seem it at first glance), (b) completely addresses the "individual protests were not notable" argument. Individual protests may not be ''article-worthy'' but Diego explained why this does not contradict ; moreover this thought experiment confirms that ''somewhere in Wikipedia there should be overview-level coverage of the history of EDL demonstrations''. It doesn't need to be at article-level granularity for each demonstration, but it should be here somewhere, and while the logical place would be in the EDL article  applies for length reasons
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Splitting (WP:SPLIT||WP:LIST||WP:SPLIT)

Comment: satisfies  and #2 and #3 and , and there's no reason why it could be considered non-neutral; it's just a list of facts with references to reliable sources for each one. Per , the list has a well-defined inclusion criterion. Given that it's not a list of statistics AND there's "sufficient explanatory text" to put it in their proper context English Defence League|here,  does not apply
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LISTPURP||WP:CSC||WP:SPLIT||WP:DISCRIMINATE||WP:IINFO)