Deletion of List of common Chinese surnames

Comment: as per  criterion #3: development; the list allows navigation among surname articles and redlinks to the surnames for which articles are not yet written. Also the objection about the lack of sources for pronunciation information for Korean, Cantonese, Mandarin, etc. is rather amusing given that these readings are common knowledge to tens or hundreds of millions of people and are listed in virtually any dictionary you can find, but I put in cites to a web-accessible source for the Korean pronunciation for the top 25, for example. Finally I fail to see how it is unencyclopedic to put the Vietnamese and Korean pronunciations in the table, given that it is nowhere stated that people with that surname are related (you don't see a disclaimer on every article about someone named Smith that they're unrelated to all the other Smiths), and further there are significant populations of both groups living in the PRC as well as populations of Chinese living in said countries who actually use those pronunciations either in everyday life or as their legal name
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: I think it's interesting to note that, most users that voted '''Delete''' doesn't seem to be Chinese, and does not seem to understand the cultural significance of Chinese surnames. Chinese surnames are not just surnames, but the history of the family's background and its origins. There are vast amount of information that could be included. The list requires development, not deletion per #Purpose of lists. AQu01rius
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: I think you are misrepresenting the policies here. To begin with, not all dictionaries specialize in giving meanings or definitions. For instance, there are dictionaries for pronunications, for frequency, grammatical usage, etc. You take a look at almost any good Chinese dictionary and you find that they indicate this or that character is also a surname. The best one also have a list of Chinese surnames in the back. As it looks now, the article is nothing but a list of surnames and their pronunications according to their frequency in the People's Republic of China. Furthermore, you are also misreading #DIR, which covers a much wider range of articles that should not be in Wikipedia
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: because #DIR|Wikipedia is not a directory. Furthermore, absolutely none of the pronounciation, Korean/Vietnamese equivalents, etc. information is sourced. Perhaps a bit of the relevant information can be included at Chinese surname, however, Wikipedia is not a place for Top 100 lists
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: reasons for nomination are invalid.   does not apply because the article presents additional non-dictionary information (a ranking of names).  #DIR is also mis-interpreted: it is not a list of ''loosely associated'' topics (#1), a geneological entry (#2)--this applies to biographical articles only, or a phone directory (#3).  If you think or are sure that the information is about the PRC only, then simply rename the article.  Changing the title of a page is not a reason to list it for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:WINAD||WP:NOT)

Comment: Invalid criteria are used for nomination to begin with.  The genealogical clause in #DIR pertains to biographical articles, stating that biographical articles must be about notable persons.  This article is not biographical, nor does it even list any people.   is also invalid, as the list does not even state the meanings of the surnames, and it can't be used in a dictionary function.  This list is a researched and published list of the 100 most common Chinese surnames.  The article is actually about such a list that is published in real life.  It's not a list that's just gathered together by WP editors.  Furthermore, it lists rankings of how common the surnames were in both 2006 and 1990, such that readers can compare the commonality rankings of different surnames, and also of commonality rankings of the same surname between 2006 and 1990.  This alone makes the article encyclopedic.  The fact that it lists the Korean and Vietnamese equivalents of these surnames actually make the article ''more'' encyclopedic.  And whether or not it's just a list of common surnames in the PRC alone is, firstly, as yet undetermined, and secondly, not grounds for deletion at all
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:WINAD)

Comment: following  criterion #3: development
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: I just had another look at Yuan (surname) and it seems that the article is based on a large amount of |original research, many of the sources quoted are dynastic histories and other primary material in classical Chinese. This is just another example of the fact that most editors involved in the project on Chinese surnames don't really understand Wikipedia policy. We're not here to publish original ideas on Chinese genealogy. I'm afraid that this article may be up for a complete rewrite. I'll give someone a chance to take care of this, but I will start cutting myself if nothing happens
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)

Comment: no valid deletion reason given, and no matter how many more parrot  without context; Without substantially addressing the points made by others above regarding the inappropriateness that guideline to this article, then the  point of a discussion (and not a vote) is surely lost too
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:WINAD)