Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual personal names (5th nomination)
per Ultraexactzz. If reliable sources document that those names are unusual and it amounts to coverage that satisfies our notability guidelines, there is no reason to delete the list. I cannot see how "people whose names have been called unusual by reliable source" can be considered a "ambivalent" or "subjective" criterion. There is nothing violating  in having this kind of list, we do not say "those names are unusual", we say "reliable third-party sources those names are unusual" and that's what NPOV is about. And of course  is a non-argument as an essay that does not reflect consensus. Regards
— User:SoWhy, 17:25, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NPOV||WP:LISTCRUFT (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view)