Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Irish centenarians
per nom: this is almost entirely based on original research. And per Fram: "a list of people notable for thing X, but grouped by thing Y, is a bad list." I've just copy-edited the page. One red flag is the repeated use of "notable" in the subheds. It ought not be there. If they're not notable, they shouldn't be here in the first place. Another is the wacky notion that, in Ireland, 100 = 110. I've requested a citation for that dubious assertion. Still another is the list of "Unverified" centenarians. Say what?! I've deleted the double entries for these four, leaving them under "Unverified" but deleting them from "Individual biographies." But what the heck are unverified entries doing on this list?  is a pillar. Finally, this assertion does not reflect the way AfD's are supposed to work: "Given that this AFD does not cover any of the other Lists of centenarians, it could only result in deletion if it provided some valid rationale specific to ''this'' list that would not be true of all such centenarian lists." Ummm, we create, edit and delete articles around here one at a time. #Deletion_of_articles| is not a useful, or even valid, argument opposing deletion
— User:David, 02:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (Wikipedia:Verifiability)