Deletion of List of basic Canada topics

Comment: The list is still under construction. It's counter-productive to nominate a list for deletion when it isn't even completed yet - by doing this you're pressuring list builders into completing drafts of lists before they post them to article space, the very place where others who may wish to collaborate would most likely find them and help out.  Collaboration is one of the main benefits of having a wiki in the first place, and AfD's like this defeat that purpose.  Chris's argument above was that the list is redundant in that it only includes links that are in the Canada article.  Well, Chris was mistaken, as the list already included coverage that wasn't included in the article at the time the AfD nomination was made, the list has more non-redundant links now than it did then, and the list continues to diverge with the Canada article as the list is being further developed.  But redundancy is totally irrelevant here.  This is a ''list'', not a paragraph-based article.  And it totally conforms to |Wikipedia's guideline on lists.  Lists serve as outlines of knowledge and as tables of contents.  Tables of contents are by their very nature redundant in scope with the material they provide easier access to!  In addition to this, this table of contents is part of a larger table of contents system - the Lists of basic topics.  (See Wikipedia:Contents for more information about the overall table of contents system).  By deleting part of the system, you in effect cripple it, forcing an edict that Wikipedia's basic table of contents can't cover Canada.  That makes no sense.  Canada is a fundamental subject, and it should be covered in Wikipedia's tables of contents systems.  The issue boils down to whether we should have a table of contents or not, and if that is the case, the entire set of Lists of basic topics should be nominated for deletion, not just a piece of it.  If a piece of the table of contents system is to be deleted, without deleting the whole thing, it should be shown how the piece is inadequate to be a part of the whole.  Nobody has done that here.  None of the deletion supporters above have explained why we shouldn't have a basic table of contents on Canada.  Nor have any of them presented justification for creating a blatant hole in the Lists of basic topics table of contents system
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: I'm not expressing one view or the other on this, but  should be noted when comparing this article with others
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS)