A height and the people who reached it. Not encyclopedic. --LeeHunter 18:47, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- If this were a list of notable people who were unusually tall (where I'm handwaving "unusually"), i.e. as tall as or taller than some boundary height that marks them as exceptional, it might be more worthwhile. But an article for only those people who were exactly 76 inches tall ... No. Merge to such a list, or Delete. Uncle G 19:13, 2005 Jan 29 (UTC)
- This is actually just one article in a series of articles, guys. I just happened to start with 6'4". Lighten Up. Getalis 1:48 PM, January 29, 2005.
- Delete before he gets around to even more articles. By the time we get to my height, we should have 90% of the adults on the planet. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 20:15, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete mundane information. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 20:28, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Interesting stuff. What's unencyclopedic about Abraham Lincoln's height? If we were listing everyone, that would be a problem, sure, but that doesn't seem to be the intention. The names need standardisation, true. Andrewa 20:44, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Hopelessly ethnocentric (a list of people taller than 2 meters would be a bit more universal). Oh yeah, it's not notable either. --21:49, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Weak delete. While a list of very tall people would be fine (perhaps there already is one?), I'm not sure 6' 4" is tall enough. Maybe List of people over 6 feet 6 inches tall, or List of people over 2 metres tall. sjorford:// 22:05, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Oy. Delete before all of the other threatened articles get created. RickK 22:20, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Not encyclopedic material. -R. fiend 22:30, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete.Mikkalai 22:36, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)