Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual personal names (5th nomination)
entirely'' fixable.  All the above complaints are addressable with only a modicum of effort.  The list can be made non-subjective (and thus compliant with ) if we insist that all names in the list be specifically identified as "unusual" (or words to that effect) in |reliable sources, and compliant with  if we cite said sources.  As for the BLP-based arguments, BLP wisely counsels us to not write about individuals if they have not already been brought to the public's attention by mainstream sources.  Limiting the article to "names that mainstream sources have noted are unusual" makes us fully compliant with BLP. I've started in on that work, and I thank JBSupreme for doing much of it as well.  I just wish he didn't feel it was necessary to both clean up the list and try to delete it at the same time; maybe he's trying to use AfD to try to force these improvements under duress.  I think that's a misuse of AfD; it should have instead been taken to the NPOV and/or BLP noticeboards.  But so be it
— User:Father, 22:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NPOV||WP:RS||WP:V (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view)