On Tue, 2 May 2006 21:16:32 +0100, you wrote:
One comment I'd like to make on this is that an essay is not a good reason to propose articles for deletion. In particular, while some poorly defined lists tend to be deleted, there is no consensus that lists *per se* are deletable.
Indeed. The listcruft essay is a reasonable and quite calm discourse to explain to those whose pet list article has been nominated, why it might be considered unencyclopaedic by some. The problem is not with the term listcruft, or with its definition, but with the necessarily arbitrary definition of what constitutes listcruft. Which is no different from the problem of any other content of debatable encyclopaedic merit, which problem is of course the reason why we require a supermajority to delete. One man's list of arbitrary fictional objects selected by arbitrary criteria and sorted by other arbitrary criteria is another man's fascinating list of seen-once Star Trek sacrificial red shirt actors sorted by date of appearance. And who's to say who's right?
Vive la difference! Guy (JzG)