Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of opponents of same-sex marriage in the United States (2nd nomination)
My sense is that this type of list is a blend of original research and  include a certain amount of bias inherent in the creation (or maintenance of the list).  The article does not introduce the topic with a description that it is designed as a current, or rolling, list of opponents. As an example, in the opponents article, there is no mention of President Clinton's stance (since changed) on the topic. Because the article is an ongoing controversy, I see it similar to lists of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Supporters and Opposers of Iran Nuclear Deal, where Nyttend stated "A list of people holding yes/no opinions on a specific current issue is fundamentally not encyclopedic. A detailed discussion of a past event, with a list of leading supporters of each position, is a very good idea, and it's quite reasonable to have lists of people by affiliations (e.g. lists of politicians by party affiliations, lists of people by religious affiliation), but simply a "Supporters and Opposers of CurrentPoliticalTopic", regardless of its title is not a good encyclopedia topic." and "As someone said at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of current top 40 albums (UK), Delete per #NEWS. An article that becomes outdated and has to be rewritten every week is essentially "List of top 40 albums (UK) for the week XX-YY Jan 2010", which would be deleted for being a current event of no lasting significance. Plus, the accuracy of articles should not depend on whether a single editor can be bothered to maintain it
— User:Enos733, 05:53, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOT (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)