Deletion of List of Royal Navy personnel in 1983

Comment: Per nom. This directory seems to be an excessively and unencylopedically detailed breakdown, unless our goal is to list a bunch of non-notable people.  If breaking it down by year, why not month or day, since someone might have retired partway through the year? This type of listing does not serve any purpose I can see, and seems to run afoul of |Wikipedia is not a directory
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIRECTORY)

Comment: per . First ships and now personnel? Grouping by year is not a good idea for lists that don't change a great deal from year to year
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIRECTORY)

Comment: I am baffled at this AfD, honestly. All of these people are notable in terms of the , and as a 1983 version of the RN's structure, it's a notable as Royal Navy#Command, control, and organisation (though it has a little less text because we haven't done the research yet). How can one build User:Dirtlawyer's history of the RN since 1945 if one deletes the supporting articles? Yes we don't have the same articles for 1982, or 1956, or the time of the withdrawal from Aden, or Confrontation in 1965-66 etc - because we haven't got around to writing them, but one can't tell the RN's story if one deletes the key personnel? On this argument, one should delete the senior officers' listing for 2014 as soon as 2015 rolls around!! This is the '''basis''' for detailed histories, because we can research these officers' names and compile the data from them!! These are crazy nominations
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)