Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of email marketing service providers


 * 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   delete. Jayjg (talk) 02:24, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Comparison of email marketing service providers

 * – (View AfD (View log  •  AfD statistics)

Unsourced comparison, tagged but issues not addressed. A comparison of just three service providers is hardly encyclopaedic and should be deleted. Biker Biker (talk) 17:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete leave it to Which?. A comparison is a subjective assessment based on the facts. Wikipedia can provide the facts but it would be illogical for it to provide the comparison. SGGH ping! 18:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Way too many low quality guides as is. Wikipedia isn't meant to be Consumer Reports. Boston2austin (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, unreferenced; these "Comparison of product type X" articles also tend to be spam magnets, and need frequent clearing out of "referenced" redlinks, serving as handy parking lots for non-notable products. MuffledThud (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Not an encyclopedic article & unref. Not even a long enough list to provide any broad comparisons. Probably fails wp:NPOV; WP isn't the place for this kind of thing, if a company/product/provider is seen as better/worst than a competitor company/product/provider. Mattg82 (talk) 00:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are numerous email marketing providers in the market to validate the need to include a current comparison of the offering. However, would agree with AfD request that more players in the industry should be displayed and references to increase merit of the article.  --68.106.235.149 (talk) 05:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC) — 68.106.235.149 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * But Wikipedia is not a consumer guide. There are plenty of sites out there which will provide subjective comparisons. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - while there may be many such providers, and many of them may be notable, an encyclopedia should not be a marketing guide. Bearian (talk) 18:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.