Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of FA Cup giant-killings
isn't "arbitrary criterion" equivalent to "|original research" really?  Why is one arbitrary criterion more or less relevant than another?  The issue here isn't whether or not the list contains shock results, that's a given, the issue is that the title of the article and the author's decision on what constitutes a "giant-killing
— User:The, 07:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)