Deletion of List of longest living dogs

Comment: as meeting point one of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LISTPURP)

Comment: Rationale seems to say that we should delete because the article needs cleanup. . The rationale also states that the list may be open to OR and POV abuse? - not reasons to delete... Rationale also cites  and that is just an essay. No policy or guideline based reasons to delete were provided in the nomination rationale. The list passes  criteria - provides information to our readers. The reliable sources exist so we keep such articles 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP||WP:TRIVIA||WP:LISTN||WP:NEXIST)

Comment: as the nomination proposes |cleanup/merger rather than deletion.  The main title-holder of Bluey (dog)|Bluey is well-established and other contenders such as http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36080853/worlds-oldest-dog-dies-at-30-in-australia-after-going-to-sleep-in-her-basket#:~:text=Maggie%2C%20who%20was%20thought%20to,Sunday%20night%20in%20her%20basket. Maggie get reasonable coverage too.  As we have a list of oldest cats, deletion of the dogs would not be |neutral
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP||WP:NPOV)

Comment: Referenced and notable.  Users need this information.  To be sure, article can be improved, but there is no reason to delete. .  erifiability not ruth
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP||WP:V||WP:T)