Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bishops in France

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. The opinions here are split rather evenly, and neither side's arguments are significantly stronger than the other, in my opinion. There were some interesting alternative solutions proposed during the discussion that seemed to find some support. It might be worthwhile to continue the discussion on the article's talk page or an RfC to see if consensus can be found for any of those proposals. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 17:28, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of bishops in France (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTMIRROR. Any reader requiring an up-to-date directory of Catholic leaders should look to the church's authoritative directory. While the upper-echelons might be notable, bishop is a relatively minor position: there are nearly 5000 bishops around the world and over 100 on this list, most of whom don't have Wikipedia pages. (Note that, while other language wikis have similar pages, with the exception of the French one, they were all created by the same editor in 2019.) pburka (talk) 21:37, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. pburka (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. pburka (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. pburka (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. A bishop is not a "relatively minor" position. Almost every diocesan bishop is the subject of coverage in multiple reliable sources. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:35, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 100 might sound like a lot when you are trying to count on your fingers, but it is still way less than the number of French MPs. SpinningSpark 23:43, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. 100 isn't a lot, but do we want similar lists for all 5000 of these officials? If this list were a historical record of French bishops it might be a different matter. It claims to be a directory of current bishops but it hasn't been updated since it was created in 2019. This isn't a defect that is WP:SURMOUNTABLE through editing: it requires permanent, ongoing maintenance. In my opinion, this indicates that the topic is non-encyclopedic. pburka (talk) 18:16, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• How many bishops there are outside of France is not in the least relevant to this AFD. This list will never be expanded to include them because it explicitly concerns France only. SpinningSpark 13:05, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per the nom. Wikipedia is not a WP:DIRECTORY. The problem is deeper though as this page acts as both a WP:MIRROR of the church's authoritative directory, and a WP:WEBHOST for the French Catholic Church. This list is a poorer version of what already exits elsewhere (and intensive maintenance burden if maintenance was ever actually performed) and it isn't the purpose of Wikipedia to be a free phonebook for all mid-level religious officials in any faith. Newshunter12 (talk) 18:53, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep a Bishop is a significant position both in the church and on a chess board. So this is a list of notable people. The fact that they are not blue link may motivate someone to start some articles. I imagine we can find coverage of each. The very first one on the list Hubert Herbreteau, is on the French Wiki. I imagine someone could transfer. Lightburst (talk) 22:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep - I imagine a fair few of these people actually qualify for articles here so the fact that they don't have articles is a reason to create more articles, not to delete this one. It also has a purpose in listing those that aren't notable to prevent articles from being created about non-notable people whose details can be recorded in list form. I totally understand the rationale here, but I fall on the side of preservation and usefulness. St★lwart¹¹¹ 23:47, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep meets WP:NLIST (has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines) with news discussions this week alone ([1] [2]). Useful for members, supporters and detractors of the Catholic church alike.‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 16:12, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as an obviously notable topic for a list particularly with current events that will probably push a number of bios to be created for some of these. The argument that we should not provide information that is available elsewhere is completely at odds with the policy that Wikipedia is based on subjects that have received multiple reliable sources coverage and should not use original research, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 02:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom or Redirect to List of Catholic dioceses in France per RandomCanadian's suggestion below. The biggest problem of this list is that its organized around living people. Consensus at AFD recently has overwhelmingly supported not utilizing lists of "living..." (even though living is not in this list's title it is a living list by design); largely because such lists are constantly changing as people age and die and maintaining accuracy and verifiability is a difficult and on-going task. Many editors consider such lists not encyclopedic (because they are inherently unstable) and in contradiction to policy at WP:LISTN. I share that view which I consider now to be the standard modus operandi/precedent at AFD within the application of NLIST in these type of list discussions. I would support keeping a list or lists of historic bishops in France, which are not based around being alive as a primary factor for inclusion.4meter4 (talk) 03:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I tend to agree that lists of living <foo> should be deprecated. However, there is no reason that this list cannot be expanded to include past bishops. As you point out, the title would not even need changing. I don't buy the maintainability issue; "list of <foo>" takes just as much maintenance as "list of living <foo>" caused by death and replacement. SpinningSpark 08:25, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinningspark I disagree. There are maintenance issues involved in lists with all people; but living people lists have more maintenance issues and can lead to more inaccuracies much more frequently (i.e. living people change; dead people don't). Such lists are usually directories and mirrors because of the maintenance needs of living lists; which is the case here. Thus living people lists usually fail WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTMIRROR. This list could be adapted, but it should be draftified to the user space of an editor willing to work on it if that is where this AFD heads. 4meter4 (talk) 17:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are just as many living people in a list of all bishops as there are in a list of living bishops. Same number, same work. That is just an arithmetic fact. SpinningSpark 18:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

True, but an expanded scope at least has the benefit of having other kinds of references (such as obits of notable bishops in major newspapers, other kinds of reference works, etc.) which prevent the list from being a WP:MIRROR of the church's authoritative directory. There's something to be said for providing a different kind of list which has many more quality sources of information supporting it. Additionally, any bishop who dies still remains on the list after death; providing more list stability which aligns it with WP:NLIST. 4meter4 (talk) 18:54, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Something nobody appears to have thought of: (based on above) An alternative would be simply having the (chronological) list of bishops in each diocese's article (where they are not NOTDIR violations)? And then this title could redirect to List of Catholic dioceses in France? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 21:54, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I updated my vote per your suggestion.4meter4 (talk) 19:50, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Doubtful -- This list would very easily become obsolete, though lack of maintenance. The equivalent for England would be a list of dioceses, each of which would have a list of past and present bishops, most of whom would have links to bio-articles. The maintenance issue is much less severe, as the relevant diocesan articles are likely to be updated as new appointments are made. The present list has almost no blue links, making it very little value as a navigation aid. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:40, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Peterkingiron: You seem to have essentially the same concerns as me. Do you think redirecting to List of Catholic dioceses in France (which is essentially the equivalent of, as you mention, List of Church of England dioceses or List of Catholic dioceses in Great Britain) would be an appropriate solution? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Catholic dioceses in France. Poorly sourced and maintained, leading to BLP issues. Sandstein 19:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sandstein When I read your comment, I felt inclined to agree about maintaining/BLP. But then I checked and the Bishops' conference in France actually has a list of all bishops on its website, from which our list seems to be taken. The list is, in fact, easy to maintain because the Conference also publishes a log of new bishop appointments on their website. It suffices to check said log every once in a while and control+F search in our list for the most recent appointee(s). If they aren't there, then they need to replace someone. I assume that every appointment comes with a firing/resignation/death since the number of dioceses (=cities with cathedrals) should be stable. I added an invisible comment about updating, and also added the list of bishops as a ref for the tables. My Keep vote stands.‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 01:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. As nominator, I'd support a redirect to List of Catholic dioceses in France. pburka (talk) 19:55, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per Sandstein. Heartmusic678 (talk) 16:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect As per Sandstein. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for various reasons. "Bishops in France" are notable as a group, hence meet WP:NLIST. We have an article on their collective assembly (Bishops' Conference of France) and the bishops, as a group, have been covered by sources[3]. This article also gives us context surrounding the list, hence this is not an example of #7 in WP:NOTDIRECTORY. I'm also not understanding the WP:MIRROR and WP:WEBHOST arguments. We have examples in Category:Lists of current office-holders which are essentially duplicates of such lists held on more authoritative governmental websites. WP:MIRROR does not necessarily mean that wikipedia should not have a list that already exists somewhere else on the internet. As for maintainability, Trimton suggested a very good way of verifying our list. Maintenance, IMO, is a WP:SURMOUNTABLE problem.VR _talk 04:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  To make things concrete, a good example is List of current United States governors, which can also be seen at www.nga.org/governors/. List of U.S. statewide elected officials is a even bigger list that constantly changes.VR _talk 18:09, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  If List of current United States governors went 2.5 years without an update I'd support deleting it, too. Lists of current things don't fall under WP:NOTIMELIMIT, in my view. If there's no group of editors constantly keeping them up to date they become liabilities. pburka (talk) 19:50, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Keep, as a bishop is a notable position and this is a useful listJackattack1597 (talk) 19:53, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I looked through all the comments and can't decide whether "keep" or "redirect" has the upper hand. More input required.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:29, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Satisfys WP:NLIST, as all people on this list are notable. Curbon7 (talk) 20:43, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.