Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methodist churches in Leicester
To expand on what I said above, since it was raised by Bookscale, this list ''does'' fail  in that every entry is at least supposed to link to a bluelinked article (that's the principal reason of a ''list'', which this ''is''). Per , ''some'' |redlinks are acceptable, ''if'' each redlinked entry would meet our otability|notability guideline(s). Even still, per , since these are primarily navigational aids, ''most'' (a substantial majority) of the churches should be bluelinks. We don't have that. Like {{u|Lightburst}} and {{u|MarkH21}}, I favour deletion here as there is nothing in the |history worth keeping beyond a ''simple listing'' of the churches and some bibliographic references. However, one |alternative to deletion that would also likely survive |DRV is draftification in that no one would be pleased but it would (a) get this non-qualifying list article out of Google-indexed '''Main:''' namespace (for those arguing deletion), (b) preserve history (for those arguing "keep" or "redirect"), and (c) allow editors to work on this list, ODEADLINES|without deadlines, in non-indexed '''Draft:''' namespace. Discussions could continue on ''what'' to include in the  list, without said fear of having a deadline and then a strong |consensus could emerge. As long as it's being edited, or discussions are taking place, there'd be no rationale for deletion ''in that namespace''. And, we've got quite a deletion history here from this, so this would save having to re-add those tags to the talk page. '''End result:'''  everyone would satisfice without the outcome
— User:Dmehus, 17:06, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:LISTN||WP:CSC||WP:REDLINK||WP:N||WP:CLN||WP:ATT||WP:ATD||WP:DRV||WP:NODEADLINES||WP:CON (Wikipedia:Notability)