Deletion of List of films considered the best

Comment: per the above. The nominator is confusing the problem of a Wikipedia article advancing subjective opinions, which violates , with the non-problem of a Wikipedia article being ''about'' subjective opinions, which does ''not'' violate . The concept and discussion of "best film" is a notable one, and an article about that concept can comply with all WP policies by summarizing the statements of notable critics and institutions and the results of significant polls. We are therefore not asserting that Film X is the best and citing to Critic Y's list to verify that claim, but instead asserting that Critic Y says Film X is the best and citing to Critic Y's list to verify only that he said it. Though of course one need not defend all such hypothetical "best of" subjects in order to defend this one (see , , and straw man), I would imagine "best song" would also fit that bill as a suitable subject matter in the same way (cf. :Category:Lists of rated songs, Albums considered the greatest ever), and even "best color" may have merit in some specific contexts such as an article about the popularity, critical assessment, and psychology of certain colors and color combinations in interior decorating or fashion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:NPOV||WP:OTHERCRAP||WP:ALLORNOTHING)

Comment: This meets criteria of  and  and is well sourced. With respects to TPH above, the criteria for inclusion on their specific lists are set by the sources provided, and we are not here to place a personal or arbitrary criteria for such... only to report and share their findings. If the list seems too long to some, then a split might be discussed on its talk page, and does not require a deletion. We do not judge the truth or not of the criteria used by the various organizations and sources for inclusion in their lists, just so long as the information provided is verifiable in sources deemed suitable for offering their judgements. As long as the list remains sourced and is not indescriminate, it serves the project and our readers. I wish to remind the http://toolserver.org/~tparis/pcount/index.php?name=FnH&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia 8-edit nominator that EVERYTHING included in Wikipedia is to be based on the |reliable sources we find on the web and elsewhere, just so long as the source is considered reliable enough for the information being sourced. We accept that American Film Institute may report on the films ''they'' consider "top". We accept that The Moving Arts Film Journal may report on the films ''they'' consider "top". We accept that IGN may report of whatever films ''they'' consider "top". We accept that Rotten Tomatoes may report of whatever films ''they'' consider "top". We accept that BBC News may report of whatever films ''they'' consider "top". We accept that Entertainment Weekly may report of whatever films they consider "top". We accept that Time (magazine) may report of whatever films they consider "top".  We do not demand or expect that all sources use the exact same criteria. As the threshold for inclusion is beased upon verifiability, and not what may or may not be a ''subjective'' or ''objective'' truth, we judge the messenger, not the message. And to address your comparison... |IF a set of experts decided to offer opinions on what they considered the best colors and why, we could consider an article. But |that's an argument for a different discussion.  The list is definitely not "against everything Wikipedia stands for" as Wikipedia specifically has criteria for such lists
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LISTPURP||WP:SALAT||WP:RS||WP:WAX||WP:WAX)

Comment: Although the article list itself is notable, the title of the page is suggesting it fails , which it doesn't. This page has been moved and renamed countless times already, and if there is any place there is to form a consensus on where to move this to the widest audience, its the AfD
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:POV)