Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of celebrities who have had an abortion
Many of the Delete rationales seem to me to be examples of one of the arguments to avoid in deletion discussions - , which says "the purpose of an encyclopedia is to provide information: the potential readership or subjective usefulness of each item does not have to be justified if the material is notable." Some of the deletion arguments suggest that because of some people's attitudes to abortion, having a list like this might put women included on it at risk. As I have said before, this information is already in Wikipedia, and easily findable elsewhere on the internet. Many of the women who spoke out about having an abortion did so when it was still illegal, and when publicly speaking about it made them susceptible to criminal charges. They accepted that very real risk. The American women who have publicly spoken as part of recent movements, when abortion has been legal in the US, know that many people are vehemently opposed to it and that there is a real risk of Anti-abortion violence (and has been for over 40 years). They have taken that risk. To say Wikipedia should not compile a list of names, many of whom volunteered to be included in a list of names published in national newspapers or magazines (eg We've had abortions! and Manifesto of the 343, both in 1971), because it might be used by anti-abortion extremists (who, according to that Wikipedia article Anti-abortion violence, "are considered a current domestic terrorist threat by the United States Department of Justice"), seems to me a classic example of invoking the invalid deletion argument 
— NONE, NONE
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:HARMFUL||WP:HARMFUL (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)