Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Georgian surnames

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. After the longest reasonably possible time for discussion, there is nothing near a consensus here, nor any trend towards developing one. Editors on both sides present interpretations of ambiguously-worded policies that are not outside the bounds of reason. The resolution, I would suggest, lies in developing some substantial requirements for inclusion. For example, as has been suggested in the discussion, removing all red links, establishing a standard of notability (such as limiting the list to the demonstrably most common surnames, or surnames connected to notable people, or some combination of these limitations), and perhaps requiring a source for every name to be included on the list. BD2412 T 04:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Georgian surnames

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I believe that this article fails WP:LISTN and WP:GNG; it is also an indiscriminate directory-style list and it has been flagged as a concern for 1.5 years. It is also original research. Spiderone 16:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous consensus to delete:

Related discussions:

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 16:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 16:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as index of articles per WP:LISTPURP and per WP:CLN as complement to Category:Georgian-language surnames, which includes 341 surname articles. postdlf (talk) 20:42, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My deletion rationale is best summarised in this section of policy, which states "As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a directory, repository of links, or means of promotion, and should not contain indiscriminate lists, only certain types of lists should be exhaustive. Criteria for inclusion should factor in encyclopedic and topical relevance, not just verifiable existence. For example, all known species within a taxonomic family are relevant enough to include in a list of them, but List of Norwegian musicians would not be encyclopedically useful if it indiscriminately included every garage band mentioned in a local Norwegian newspaper." This article violates that because it is an indiscriminate list of every Serbian given name and is largely unverifiable. Spiderone 21:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete CLN applies when the list can provide something beyond mere alphabetized links. This article does not, and should not be kept unless demonstrated to provide something better than being a context-free directory. Information can also go at Georgian name. Reywas92^Talk 02:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep: legit list per WP:CLN, WP:NOTDUP states: "building a rudimentary list of links is a useful step in improving a list. Deleting these rudimentary lists is a waste of these building blocks" and WP:AOAL lays out potential advantages. // Timothy :: talk 14:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And per appropriate topics for lists, we have "Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value, unless they are split into sections. For example, a list of brand names would be far too long to be of value." and "Some Wikipedians feel that some topics are unsuitable by virtue of the nature of the topic. Following the policy spelled out in What Wikipedia is not, they feel that some topics are trivial, non-encyclopedic, or not related to human knowledge. If you create a list like the "list of shades of colors of apple sauce", be prepared to explain why you feel this list contributes to the state of human knowledge." This article covers a topic that is too large, unverifiable and, most importantly, has no place in an encyclopaedia. Spiderone 14:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As postdlf. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 20:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (changed vote): I was reading this discussion Spiderone posted and the mention of "List of Jewish names" startled me. I actually can't believe it didn't occur to me immediately what various lists of names that usually to belong to a particular group have been used for historically. This may not have occured to others as well. I know this was absolutely not in anyway the intention with these Wikipedia lists, but good intentions can be used by those with other than good intentions. This is enough for me to switch to Delete. I doubt there is a policy or guideline to directly support this reasoning, but per WP:IGNORE I think Delete is the best way to improve the encyclopedia. // Timothy :: talk 07:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I totally agree with the other delete voters. This list is indiscriminate, full of useless links, isn't sourced, and ultimately isn't useful. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.
The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists, which says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." I will show below that "Georgian surnames" has been treated as a "a group or set by independent reliable sources".

Sources
1. Gabeskiria, Giorgi (2001). Itonishvili, Vakhtang (ed.). The Heritage of Georgia: Where a Georgian comes to. Translated by Gogolashvili, Kote. Tbilisi. ISBN 9789992802519. OCLC 500502423. Retrieved 2020-08-10.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  The book notes: "The list of 50 most numerous Georgian family names look as follows: 1. Beridze (24,797), 2. Kapanadze (18,550), 3. Gelashvili (17,995), 4. Maisuradze (16,516), 5. Giorgadze (14,582), 6. Kvaratskhelia (13,618), 7. Lomidze (12,949), 8. Shengelia (12,764), 9. Tsiklauri (12,499), 10. Khutsishvili (11,062), 11. Bolkvadze (11,059), 12. Nozadze (10,784), 13. Abuladze (10,438), 14. Gogoladze (9,791), [36 more Georgian family names"]"
2. Axuašvili, Iakob; Silagaże, Avtʻandil (1997). Kʻartʻul gvar-saxeltʻa saidumloebani = Taĭny gruzinskikh imen i familiĭ = Mistery [sic] of Georgian names and surnames. Tʻbilisi: Molodini. OCLC 42690323.
3. Bondyrev, Igor V.; Davitashvili, Zurab V.; Singh, Vijay P. (2015). The Geography of Georgia: Problems and Perspectives. Cham: Springer Science+Business Media. p. 53. ISBN 978-3-319-05412-4. Retrieved 2020-08-10.
  The book notes:
  
  5.19 Georgian Surnames
  The Georgian surnames have an extremely old history. They clearly demonstrate a subethic origin. In the provinces of western Georgia, surnames tend to end in "dze", Megrelian surnames end in "ia," "ua," and "ava"; Svanian surnames end in "ani." The same surname ending prevails in Lechkhumi. In Kartli-Kakheti and Meskheti-Javakheti, the most common surname ending is "shvili." There are a few surnames ending in "dze." In eastern Georgian mountainous areas, surnames usually end in "uri" and "dze," but there are exceptions. The Georgian surnames are widely distributed among the non-Georgian population in Georgia. Jews, Kists, a part of Abkhazians, and Ossetians carry Georgian surnames. Among the most widespread Georgian surnames are Beridze, Kapanadze, Gelashvili, Maisuradze, Giorgadze, Kvaratskhelia, Lomidze, Tsiklauri, Shengelia, and Khutsishvili.
4. Pirtskhalava, Ekaterine (2018-09-21). "Being here and there: a case study of Muslim Meskhetians' identity and belonging, formation and reconstruction in the United States". Caucasus Survey. Routledge. doi:10.1080/23761199.2018.1499299. ISSN 2376-1199. Retrieved 2020-08-10.
  The article notes on page 10: "In exploring of the role of name shift (change in surnames) in the construction of identity, it is important to begin by noting that Georgian surnames originating in the southwest of the Republic of Georgia usually end with –ia, -ava, -dze, –shvili, or -eli; for example: Svanidze, Papaladze, Chakhalidze, or Sulkhanishvili, Gogolashvili, Jakeli."
5. Commire, Anne; Klezmer, Deborah; Morgan, Barbara, eds. (1999). Women in World History: A Biographical Encyclopedia. Waterford, Connecticut: Yorkin Publications. Gale. p. 148. ISBN 0-7876-3736-X. Retrieved 2020-08-10.
  The book notes: "Some titles from that period gradually evolved into common Georgian surnames. Some known today which originated in large households include Amilakhvari (Master of the Royal Stables); Amirejibi (Master of the Chamber); and Meghvinetukhutsesi (Chief Wine Steward)."
6. Hewitt, George (2005) [1996]. Georgian: A Learner's Grammar. Abingdon: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-31657-1. Retrieved 2020-08-10.
  The book notes: "Most surnames of Georgians proper (i.e. not Mingrelians or Svans) end in -švili child or -je son (earlier heir). Surnames of the first type are stressed on the first vowel of the ending, as though this were an independent word (e.g. q'arq'arašvíli, čubinašvíli). Those of the second type carry stress on the penultimate syllable (e.g. šaníje, ševardnáje)."
7. Coene, Frederik (2010). The Caucasus - An Introduction. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-135-20301-6. Retrieved 2020-08-10.
  The book notes: "Georgian family names often divulge information about the historic region where their ancestors lived: -dze (Kratli, Imereti and Guria), -shvili (Kartli and Kakheti), -ia (Samegrelo), -iani (Svaneti), -uri (east Georgia), -va (Abkhazia and Adjara), -ua (Samegrelo and Georgians from Abkhazia). The suffix -eli mostly indicates a name based on a city — for example, Rustaveli (from the city Rustavi)."
8. Kurtsikidze, Shorena; Chikovani, Vakhtang (2002-05-01). Walker, Edward (ed.). "Georgia's Pankisi Gorge: An Ethnographic Survey". Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies. University of California, Berkeley: 14. Retrieved 2020-08-10. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  The article notes in a footnote on page 14, "Georgian family names in Kist villages include Duishvili (formerly Varduashvili), Tskhadadze, Kotorashvili, Mghebrishvili, Gakhutashvili, Gonashvili, Tsintsalashvili, and Bekauri."
The list is not indiscriminate.

Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information says Wikipedia articles should not be: "Summary-only descriptions of works", "Lyrics databases", "Excessive listings of statistics", and "Exhaustive logs of software updates". This article is none of these, so it is not indiscriminate.

The list might never be complete, which is fine.
It is fine for the list never to be complete per Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists#Incomplete lists:
Because of Wikipedia's role as an almanac and a gazetteer as well as an encyclopedia, it contains a large number of lists. Some lists, such as the list of U.S. state birds, are typically complete and unlikely to change for a long time. Some lists, however, cannot be considered complete, or even representative of the class of items being listed; such lists should be immediately preceded by the {{Expand list}} template, or one of the topic-specific variations that can be found at Category:Hatnote templates for lists. Other lists, such as List of numbers, may never be fully complete, or may require constant updates to remain current – these are known as "dynamic lists", and should be preceded by the {{Dynamic list}} template.

General notability guideline
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the subject to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 07:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails INDISCRIMINATE, LISTN and NOTDIR. Ravenswing 22:43, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Response to Cunard - I'm not suggesting that Georgian surnames are not a notable topic and, indeed, some of those references that you have found could be used in the article Georgian name; I am simply arguing that an exhaustive list of every single surname possessed by a Georgian is unencyclopaedic and shouldn't be on Wikipedia. Spiderone 09:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I could go either way on this list. Per: WP:LISTN - Does it aid our readers navigation? maybe, does it provide information which is useful to readers? yes. Keeping this does not hurt the encyclopedia. Deleting might. I do not think it is indiscriminate. Wm335td (talk) 21:49, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – bradv🍁 03:43, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional keep - We have lots of pages about Georgian surnames, so a navigational list is perfectly reasonable. But definitely opposed to trying to create some exhaustive list of all surnames that exist (a WP:SALAT problem, among others), regardless of whether there's an article. Keep, and remove all of the redlinks and cross-wiki links. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The list is absolutely useless and mostly WP:OR. An emperor /// Ave 00:46, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Anything in the article/list that is notable should easily be able to be added to Georgian name. And in that regard, @Cunard:, the sources you listed above seem like they should be used in the Georgian name article, which could use some strong references like those. Kaiser matias (talk) 05:43, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree with Rhododendrites rationale again here: There are articles about people with Georgian surnames, so it is a navigational list fulfilling LIST criteria. Wm335td (talk) 18:47, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep LISTN is clearly met, as would be the case with a list of names of any country. INDISCRIMINATE and NOTDIR are not really applicable when LISTN is met. Without there being annotations at the moment, this is quite redundant to the category but that's generally not a problem per WP:NOTDUPE. SD0001 (talk) 13:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:LC items 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 11. Stifle (talk) 11:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LC is an essay. Wm335td (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And a pretty poor one at that. WP:LC #2 says The list is of interest to a very limited number of people: a list of names of a whole county is of interest to a very limited number of people, really? #3 The list is a violation of Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: NOTDIR is highly subjective. #7 The list has no content beyond links to other articles, so would be better implemented as a (self-maintaining) category: directly contradicts WP:CLN which is a guideline. #8 The list is unencyclopaedic, i.e. it would not be expected to be included in an encyclopedia: nonsense. #11 The list's membership is volatile and requires a disproportionate amount of effort to keep up to date.: completeness is not a requirement, there's WP:NODEADLINE. SD0001 (talk) 05:07, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:LISTPURPOSE being soundly met. ——Serial 16:50, 28 August 2020 (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.