Deletion of List of Major League Baseball records considered unbreakable (2nd nomination)

Comment: Records are only highly unlikely to be broken given current conditions; however, conditions have changed throughout Major League Baseball history, and so virtually all records could be broken. As I recall, both Bill James and Baseball Prospectus have written about how records like 300 wins may become approachable again in the future. I don't believe there is a sufficiently well-founded central thesis for the concept of records that are considered unbreakable; each record requires its own explanation of the state of the game in the context of the achievement, why the record is difficult to break today, and what conditions would have to return (or be introduced) in order for the record to no longer be considered unbreakable. As such, I think the list is in danger of being a list of |non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations. I suggest that the articles for each achievement in question be expanded if necessary to include reliably-sourced discussion of how the changing conditions of MLB over the years have affected the ability to set new highs/lows for the achievement
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIRECTORY)

Comment: There's lots of well-sourced, interesting content here but I just don't understand the point of the article itself. It can't ever meet , since it's fundamentally an objective set of stats based on a subjective concept. At risk of falling down a slippery slope, what if we had 'List of Major League Baseball players considered the best' or 'List of Major League Baseball matches considered really quite awesome'? It's easy to see how these are subjective and not suitable (even if they meet ). It's a shame because it's a well-researched piece, but it just doesn't seem an encyclopedic topic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:RS)

Comment: The article must have the "Life" references  and some of the other references fixed.  If it is, then there is  and I feel it passes . As a side comment, there might be an argument to move the article to a different name so that it is '''less of a  sounding title
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N||WP:POV)