Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional New Zealanders
Does not fail : ''Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value, unless they are split into categories. For example a list of brand names would be far too long to be of value. If you have an interest in listing brand names, try to limit the scope in some way (by product category, by country, by date, etc.). '' - This is exactly the case: the list is specific in scope, being about (1)fictional characters and (2)New Zealanders only. Also: ''Selected lists of people should be selected for importance/notability in that category and should have Wikipedia articles'' , and that is the case here. Also, ''An exception is nationality/ethnicity'', and we're doing exactly that. Does not fail , not falling under any of the categories specified; the list is well discriminate in scope and in content, containing almost only notable entries (notable enough to have a WP article or being otherwise well covered in WP). Does not fail , since it is not a ''Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics'', but a list of characters tightly linked by nationality (see also above). The "impractical" argument does not hold, since we use to split in sub-lists any list that becomes too large, see List of people for an example of such hierarchical listing. Arguments about the current state of the list do not hold, since per |deletion policy we don't delete on the basis of article quality. About the "slippery slope" argument, we already have such lists for other countries. About the "a category is better" argument, remember that categories and list are by no means mutually exclusive. The list is not a random intersection: it is a good starting point to investigate the role of New Zealand in fiction
— User:Cyclopia, 20:59, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SALAT||WP:IINFO||WP:NOTDIR||WP:ATD (Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists)