Deletion of List of fictional United States Presidents (2nd nomination)

Comment: Ideally each entry on the list should have a Wikipedia article but this is not required if it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future." That's from , in case you were interested. There is no way that any of these fictional presidents would, or could, have a |verifiable article written about them
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:MOSLIST||WP:V)

Comment: It is somewhat interesting to read, and is far from the worst article on Wikipedia. Arguing for keeping this is that some commenting here  feel it satisfies , probably by being informative or by being useful in navigation. That seems a value judgement, and I just do not share it. Arguing against keeping it is that it violates #DIR "Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as (but not limited to) quotations, aphorisms, or persons (real or fictional)."  These fictional presidents have nothing to do with one another, for the most part. They are generally not successors, but rather exist in unrelated fictional universes. We could just as easily have a list of fictional outlaws, of fictional U.S generals,  of fictional European knights, or of fictional  warlords, which would also fail . This list also includes a great many entries who are utterly non-notable, having been mentioned in only one episode of a cartoon or tv show. Any entry in such a list should have been discussed in secondary sources beyond the fictional work
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST||WP:NOT||WP:NOT)

Comment: per .  Sincerely
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: Per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: Can it with the "strongs" and the "ridiculouses" and "crufts."  As for NOT#INFO, exactly which part of that do you think applies?  I read it and it doesn't seem particularly relevant.  #PAPER seems more relevant.  If people wanted to study fictional representations of: US Presidents, first black presidents, women, assassinations of presidents, etc. it would be useful.  This isn't like providing great detail about trivia of a single (or even multiple) fictional universes.  And unlike, say, a list of "great wizards" or some such thing, this relates to a real subject of import.  There's no great detail about any of the individuals, no "waxing about their favorite books, movies, etc." and if that started happening, those additions could be deleted, rather than the whole list.  Actually, in some cases more detail would be desirable, like dates of publication, if someone wanted to study whether fictional representations of US Presidents occurred more often at certain times in history, and why that might be.  Why it would be argued that it makes sense to have individual articles without a list, I'm not quite sure.  There are individual articles of actual US Presidents and a list of them...? Regards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: I brought out the main points from WP:NOT#INFO, from the  (Content
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)