Deletion of List of Hindus (2nd nomination)

Comment: Clearly not |an appropriate topic for a list. By "convert", it seems people mean "get rid of this article and create a totally new one on a different topic (lists of Hindus rather than Hindus), then redirect this title to that new article". That's not a sensible outcome for AfD. It's the equivalent of "Redirect to a page that will be created later". If you're using neither the content nor even the ''title'' of the article we're discussing, the outcome is delete. If there's a redirect target, we could redirect, but it doesn't make sense to close an afd as "create a redirect target and redirect to it". Deletion doesn't preclude the creation of other articles, lists, or lists or lists, and doesn't preclude redirecting this when an appropriate target emerges. &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (WP:SALAT)

Comment: current list, and then '''Redirect''' to Lists of Hindus. The current list fails Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists: ''Selection criteria (also known as inclusion criteria or membership criteria) should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by |reliable sources.''  The criteria here, ''notable people who are or were Hindus'' are not supported by reliable sources.  See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section.  As to the list of lists mentioned by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: and convert to list of lists per Lugnuts and Andrew D. I honestly don't understand most of the criticism above, which seems to ignore that we almost always limit lists of people to only those who have or merit articles, so the number of Hindus in the world is irrelevant. It's also not credible that who qualifies as "Hindu" is unverifiable, and for this list (and any appropriate sublists) that's all that reliable sources need to support. So keep per  and as complementary to :Category:Hindus per . Everything else is editing; there are no valid deletion arguments here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:LISTPURP||WP:CLN)

Comment: The potential size of a list is not a reason to delete because it is our policy that |Wikipedia is not paper and so there's no practical limit to the amount of information we can hold.  See also List of Christians; List of Muslims; List of Jews; List of Buddhists, &c.  It would be absurd to delete one of the world's major religions while keeping the others
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTPAPER)

Comment: Being a big article is not a reason for deletion. This is a list with a clear inclusion criteria of a notable attribute. The issue of there being more than one billion is mis-leading, as the list on WP will be tailored to include only '''notable''' individuals (IE those with articles). If the list becomes too large, it can be split, per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SIZE)