Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Long articles in Rees's Cyclopaedia
I consider the list encyclopedic, and suggested its creation separately from Rees's Cyclopaedia for the usual reasons of relieving a longish article of a long related list. The material is of scholarly interest, certainly, and will be more valuable here and wikified than anywhere else. The list is selective and was designed with  in mind. Importantly, I don't think  applies here at all: where is anything that "serves to advance a position not advanced by the sources"? Please can we not use "original research" in a loose and discouraging fashion
— User:Charles, 08:17, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:LSC||WP:NOR (Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists)