Deletion of List of fictional Jews

Comment: This list meets all the requirements of .  Individual entries may need consideration, but inclusion criteria is clear, subject is notable and sourcing is adequate
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:list)

Comment: While there is much pruning necessary, along with the need for some prose to introduce the article, what is here is reliable and verifiable. Per , lists AND categories are designed to co-exist synergisticly, each one helping expand the other and serving as an aid to navigation. Jclemens is dead right about the re herring raised in the nomination, which has no relevance here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates (WP:CLN)

Comment: Categories do not supersede lists - see .  Jews in fiction are highly notable - see http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbs=bks:1&tbo=p&q=intitle:jew+intitle:fiction&num=10 numerous books on this topic
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates (WP:CLS)

Comment: per all the above keeps.  Per the suggestion that a category is sufficient, if that were wiki policy we would delete massive numbers of lists that we have now.  Lists, among other things, allow for the addition of information that cannot be added to cats.  They also allow for refs to support the inclusion in the list, which cats do not do.  See , which states:  Redundancy of lists and categories is beneficial because the two categories work together; the principle is covered in the guideline Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates. Like categories, lists can be used for keeping track of changes in the listed pages, using the Related Changes feature. Unlike a category, a list also allows detection of deletion of its entries, and, more generally, a history of its contents is available; lists also permit a large number of entries to appear on a single page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LISTPURP)

Comment: per nom, ,  and precedent shown by nom. This concept is much better handled by the category system, while this list which could never be completed would be an unwieldy and incomplete mess - useless for an encyclopaedia. Notable jews in fiction will have articles with full information, and those can be placed in the category. I'm struggling to see any valid rationales in the keep !votes (and plain votes) above
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR||WP:SALAT)