Deletion of List of politicians in India charged with corruption

Comment: I think it would appropriate to have an article about those who have been ''convicted''.  The mere fact that they've been ''charged'' (or in many cases in this article, merely ''accused'') is not appropriate to mention.  Anyone can accuse anyone of anything.  The mere fact of reporting the allegation may do political damage even if the person is innocent, and we have to presume they ''are'' innocent until a Court finds them guilty.  Therefore, I have ,  and specifically  concerns with this list.  I think the situation is different in specific articles.  Compare and contrast Julian Assange who has been accused of a crime but not charged or convicted.  Because Assange is vastly notable for other reasons, because he has been through an exhaustive appeal process and a Court has found that he has a case to answer, and through sheer volume of coverage, it ''is'' appropriate to mention that Assange has been accused of offences in the article about him.  But I do not think it would be appropriate to list him in a List of Australian journalists charged with sex crimes, if we had such a thing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:NPOV||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: per nom. & others in favor of deletion. |BLP nightmare indeed
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: though I am open to being persuaded. Can someone please point to me where in  it states that high profile people (which every politician with a WP article is) cannot be described as having been accused of a crime? I'm specifically drawing the line here at politicians for which charges have been filed in a relevant court of law (or, in India, there are bureacratic, extra-judicial equivalencies)?  Note that this article used to be something like "accused of corruption", and after quite a bit of work, specifically with reference to  concerns, we restricted it only to those people with charges filed. Lastly, please note that the indefinite semi-protection is irrelevant--it's there because new/IP users don't understand or refuse to accept the "accused"/"charged" distinction. No one would argue that indefinite semi-protection on Barack Obama is somehow an argument for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:BLP)

Comment: as it's a violation of , especially as it pertains to a |neutral portrayal of the subject(s). While we can nitpick on individual entries, the main issue here is that an accusation is not something that's neutral, unlike a conviction. Cases can be genuine, politically motivated, otherwise falsified etc, and in a list such as this, we portray only the accusation, without all the other aspects of the bios of the individual(s). This is quite different from an article on the subject where such aspects can be dealt with individually, providing due real estate for such things. &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:NPOV)