Deletion of List of people who do not label their sexual orientation

Comment: Seriously?  Quite aside from that I don't remotely accept the creator's quite subjective definitions - which are half-neologism - the examples given conflate refusal to define one's sexual preference into some flavor of bisexuality.  You know something?  Stick a microphone in my face and ask me what my sexual preference is, I'm likely to respond "None of your bloody business."  Does that make me a Person Who Does Not Label My Sexual Orientation?  Enormously subjective, fails  insofar as it could include a few hundred million people
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: per the fact that the list fails  by virtue of including any public personality who desires some privacy. Also, the history of the article is a bit interesting with the name changes etc. -SpacemanSpiff
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (WP:SALAT)

Comment: as I don't think I can objectively vote on this, but I have to say, what are we, OK! Magazine? I know that "inherently unencyclopedic" is a , but this sure seems that way to me
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ATA)

Comment: Time to close per 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: Seems like it could be a pointless, infinite, impossible to keep up list. However, should it be kept, at the risk of making a  argument, I'd like to use the precedent to make List of people who are not Batman
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFF)

Comment: Ridiculous and impractical -ish concept at best. At worst, a POV attempt to list all the people who won't publicly bend to set social labels of sexuality
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)