Deletion of List of unusual deaths (5th nomination)

Comment: Indiscriminate and unmanageable listcruft. Inclusion criteria are and will always be purely subjective. ANY death can be described as "unusual", and the use of that word by a journalist even in a reliable source is nothing more than a personal opinion, almost always based on ignorance. Whether a particular death has been described by someone as "unusual" is purely trivial and not at all encyclopedic, jsut like calling something "cool" or "funny". Furthermore, having read through all of the previous AfD's, I have never seen an argument that doesn't boil down to  or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT||WP:ITSINTERESTING)

Comment: most of the concerns in the nomination are simply not valid reasons for deletion.  is an essay, and even if the list is biased towards recent deaths that's not a valid reason to delete it. If the article is primarily sourced to unreliable sources that is likewise not a reason to delete it, unless there are no reliable sources on the topic at all. Yes, deciding what constitutes an "unusual death" has a large element of subjectivity, but we can largely avoid problems by pushing the determination of "unusual" to the sources, in a similar way to List of films considered the best. It is clear that there are a very large number of sources listing people who have died in unusual circumstances, and I should point out that most of the sources cited by this page report the circumstances of the person's death because it is considered to be unusual
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENT)

Comment: as  unless there's an applicative rule for 'unusualness' and each of the list items is checked against it. Also remove items which contain medical information where there is no indication that there was an autospy or coronial inquest (or similar
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: very few keep arguments in the past 4 AfDs have been policy-based (more ), while the delete arguments have been policy-based. Article suffers from  and can't help but fall under . Also agree with nom
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT||WP:OR||WP:INDISCRIMINATE)