Deletion of List of consorts of Bar

Comment: I agree that the "references" are useless, but, in the case of the example you mentioned, the article Beatrice of Paris does have two sources. Lists have the advantage that it is possible to include members who are not individually notable, or who do not yet have their own Wikipedia article, and a redlink indicates the need for one.  actually says "Family histories should be presented only where appropriate to support the reader's understanding of a notable topic." Rulers of states or provinces are notable, and even where the consort is not notable in themselves, knowing relationships between a ruler and their wife's or mother's family supports understanding of the topic. I did notice, googling "countess of Bar", that in fact there are three places called Bar, Bar-le-Duc (which this article relates to), Bar-sur-Seine, and Bar-sur-Aube, and there were countesses of all three. It would probably be useful to indicate somewhere (perhaps on this page, perhaps on the article Duchy of Bar) that this relates only to the first. (French Wikipedia has an article ''Liste des comtes de Bar-sur-Seine''.) I would suggest that 'List of countesses and duchesses of Bar' is a more obvious page name, however
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTGENEALOGY)

Comment: Lists are problematic because they are different to articles, and have their own guideline page: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists, which seemingly allows lists to be created without the need for sources: . Removing lists like these can be difficult because there are few policies and guidelines that give clear advice on when a list should be deleted. If I had time enough and energy, I would write a notability guide for lists, but I don't. However, if someone else wishes to write such a guideline, give me a ping and I'll certainly help out where I can
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (WP:LISTVERIFY)