Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Internet forum software


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus . Jaranda wat's sup 21:49, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

List of Internet forum software
Doesn't offer anything new over Category:Internet forum software. Talrias (t | e | c) 14:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment: Capi crimm deleted most of the software without articles last month (List of Internet forum software):


 * After 31 October 2005 I am going to delete all forum software that has no wiki article. This page is for """common""" internet forum software. That is the only criteria that has been applied to this page so far. Not having a wiki-page signals a forum software as """uncommon""" to me. So unless the following situation happen: (a)someone presents a new criteria on what software should be listed, (b) someone presents a resonable argument as to why a software is common, (c) someone creates wikipages for all of the software. You can expect a weeding to be done of this page. I feel the extra forums present no use besides clutter to the page.


 * Would there be more of an incentive to keep if those were re-added and short summaries written for some? æle ✆ 19:09, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes - as it is this has absolutely nothing which the corresponding category doesn't have (and it probably less). Talrias (t | e | c) 16:34, 5 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete Works better as a categoryTheRingess 20:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm relisting this as I don't think 3 contributors to the AFD is enough to make a decision. Talrias (t | e | c) 15:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, quite a handy list if you're thinking about setting up a forum (an idea I've toyed with - this is a valuable resource). Dan100 (Talk) 15:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Plenty of other lists mirror their categories. That's the point of the list, to be like a category but allow the option of adding short descriptions or other content. &mdash; 0918 BRIAN &bull; 2005-12-14 15:50

I'd also like to point people towards Comparison of Internet forum software as a much more useful representation of this information. Talrias (t | e | c) 15:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Comparison of Internet forum software as per Talrias. That is a much better page.  Also, apparently phpBB ain't as good as I thought - it doesn't even have comment threading.  No wonder I don't use it any more.  --Cyde Weys talkcontribs 15:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, I also think this works better as a category. Nandesuka 16:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, I agree that this works better as a category. &mdash; J I P  | Talk 16:03, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. List is alphabetical and has no commentary or classification.  A category would accomplish the same purpose, be easier to read, and automatically update itself. &mdash;  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( TALK )  16:22, Dec. 14, 2005


 * Keep. -- JJay 17:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Any particular reason why? Talrias (t | e | c) 17:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Good list and better than category. Should be expanded per above. -- JJay 17:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, uncommented pile of names, nothing that couldn't be done with a category. Pilatus 17:58, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, encyclopedic. Christopher Parham (talk) 18:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and turn into a category. Nothing is gained by having this list instead of a cat.Gateman1997 19:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment: Is there anything against having forum software without wiki articles? There're a lot of CMSes without articles at List of content management systems. If we can't have red-linked packages, then I support deletion, but an advantage of a list over a category is that it can have entries for things without articles. æle ✆ 00:13, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Exactly. Plus anoms can't create pages or use a category, but can edit lists. -- JJay 00:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Someone explained why the removed the redlinked forum software on the talk page. It's been quoted up at the top of this page. Talrias (t | e | c) 00:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand - useful and notable list. A comparison page would be nice too... Blackcats 20:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * What? There is a comparison page. See Comparison of Internet forum software. How do you propose the page should be expanded? Talrias (t | e | c) 21:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Redirect per User:Talrias. We don't need two articles on the same topic. &mdash; HorsePunchKid &rarr;&#x9F9C;  2005-12-16 04:25:56Z


 * Keep, no redirect. Cf. List of email clients and Comparison of email clients. The role of the articles is distinct and they should be separate.  Grue   17:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Better as a category. -R. fiend 19:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. For heaven's sake stop doing these pointless pro forma AfD listings from DRV. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Uh, I don't follow how your criticism is related to your vote. I had idea it was listed on WP:DRV, and I made my own mind up to reopen the AFD as I thought 2 votes and a comment weren't really enough. Talrias (t | e | c) 01:04, 19 December 2005 (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.