Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of professional sportspeople convicted of crimes
there's quite a bit of commentary on the issue of crime among sportspeople, so this is ''not'' just a random intersection of two qualities.  As for the arguments along the lines of "What about List of newscasters who are allergic to cats," then if at some point there starts to be significant commentary (multiple articles and books written) about the unusually high prevalence of cat allergies among newscasters, then yes, at that point we should have List of newscasters who are allergic to cats too. In response to the claim that a close eye would have to be kept on the article to avoid addition of unnecessary information, yes, that's certainly true but |not a reason to delete. I certainly have at least a couple of articles on my watchlist where people often add unsourced and OR examples, but that's not a reason to delete those articles
— User:Chuck, 19:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:PROBLEM (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)