Deletion of List of disbarred lawyers

Comment: The focus of this article is negative, and contentious.  Also gives |undue weight.  There is no biographical or encyclopaedic value.  Best
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)

Comment: D_mn'd |useful, but utterly inappropriate to Wikipedia.  Put it on a Website where it belongs
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USEFUL)

Comment: a worthwhile list. I went ahead and removed all the unsourced entries. New additions should be |verifiable and notable (existing wiki articles on them
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: I generally agree with Psychonaut.  Since general notability is assumed for membership on a list, we're not obliged to compile a list of non-notable lawyers who were disbarred.  Lists and categories are |complementary, so the argument that "this should just be a category" holds little weight.  And, as noted by several above, to the extent that it's claimed that there are BLP issues with such a list, categories pose larger problems: lists are articles with references, categories are generated by tags
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: essentially per Psychonaut. |Issues have been largely addressed since AfD nom. Per , no need to have only a category instead. Disbarments of notable people are significant events (or more rarely, the disbarment itself is notable), thus it's reasonable to have this sort of list
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEY||WP:CLN)