Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bibliography of South America
I agree that this meets , which is the primary criterion on which it should be judged. The argument that the topic is too broad isn't convincing: we have lots of articles on vast topics (life, history, outer space, etc.) that we keep to a manageable size using summary style and editorial discretion. There's no reason the same principles can't be applied to a bibliography: if this grows to an unreasonable length (which I'll note hasn't happened yet in the more than a decade since it was created) or if there's a consensus it's  in its current form, we could split off sections by geographical or historical divisions or by field, and/or we could apply any number of criteria to limit the list's scope. There's probably a need for a broader discussion of how we approach bibliographies, especially topical ones rather than ones for authors – are they intended to be comprehensive; if so are they indiscriminate, and if not how do we decide what to include and what to leave out (does anyone else think there should be a separate Wikimedia project for bibliographies?) – but there certainly seems to be a consensus that we ought to ''have'' them, and in this case |resolving whatever problems this one may have is preferable to deletion. &ndash;&nbsp
— User:Arms, 14:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:LISTN||WP:INDISCRIMINATE||WP:NOTCLEANUP (Wikipedia:Notability)