Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nokia products (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. --Core desat 04:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

List of Nokia products
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

List of non-notable products. Wikipedia is not a directory and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This article adds little value and is unencyclopedic in addition to being unreferenced. Mikeblas 15:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete Recently, Wikipedia made the news because of its increasing use as a corporate vehicle (ex., International Herald-Tribune, "Corporate editing of Wikipedia revealed", www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/19/business/wiki.php ). You kind of have to wonder who would create a Wikipedia article about all the models of Nokia phones that have ever been made.  An obsessed cellular fan?  Perhaps.  I think this one comes straight from the public relations branch. Mandsford 16:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep This article is neither filled with non-notable products nor is it indiscriminate information. It is extremely valueable as it presents a complete list of Nokia products with additional information in sortable lists allowing for comparison. Lists such as these replace having an encyclopedic article for every product. However, The article does need referencing and some clean-up. I also do not understand nominating this article again. Looking at the old AFD, the consensus was overwhelmingly "Keep". Rwhealey 17:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Most of the products are cell phones. They're not notable; the industry is completely saturated with them and these are not innovative or ground-breaking examples. Other products listed include ADSL modems, which are completely pedestrian. The encyclopedic articles you refer to are largely unreferenced, read like adverts, include trivia sections, and are mostly orphans. -- Mikeblas 01:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep For the reasons expressed above, and due to several of the phones named having their own articles. As this list offers more than just a directory of models, but rather other relevant information, it's better than a category.  FrozenPurpleCube 17:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  18:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Wikipedia is not a directory. Lack of evidence of notability.  --Coppertwig 23:45, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep – This is a useful and informative list. I've used it many times for phone research. It just needs to be cleaned up and de-redlinked. —TigerK 69 18:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - Non-notable products? The article links to over a hundred different articles on Nokia-products. If you think they are non-notable, you should start the discussion on those articles. -- Petri Krohn 03:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have, not that it's relevant. Please note WP:OTHERSTUFF. -- Mikeblas 04:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think it's disingenuous to cite WP:OTHERSTUFF here - Petri Krohn was referring to the content of the article, and not saying 'but 'List of Samsung products' was kept. Wibbble 14:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - survived 2005 deletion vote, should survive this one too. -- Fuzheado | Talk 23:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. 1. non-notable products (WP:NN) - to argue this, I think you would have to argue against the existence of the linked articles about each phone and series. If they exist, this list is useful, and much better than a Category. 2. not a directory - None of WP:NOT apply (1 - these topics are clearly not loosely associated; 2 - not genealogical or phonebook; 3/4 are aimed at avoiding promotional material, whereas this is archival). Similarly 3 - It is hardly indiscriminate (WP:NOT). Personally, I have just this week found this article a very useful resource after starting work at phone-related company - finding information and comparisons on non-current models is not as easy as it might be. (You may take that as a declaration of interest if you wish, but I've also found it useful before) That said, I agree with comment here and in the previous AfD (and in Talk) that the page needs cleaning up. (Aside: the revision history suggests that you proposed this before reading the previous AfD debate, and I don't feel that this AfD adds anything new) - Royan 10:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep While I wonder if we really need an article on every cellphone in existence, this is no more a directory than List of Google products, List of IBM products, Amiga models and variants, List of Intel microprocessors, or List of Microsoft Windows versions. And if by "directory" you mean "repository of information", then every article fails WP:NOT. Deletion_policy/Brand_name_products says "Minor products from a company should be merged into a 'list of minor products from this company' which is kept in the company article, unless it becomes too large as above." This list appears too large for the Nokia article. I'm wary of Wikipedia being used for marketing, but I don't think this article reads like an advertisement. Words like "ground-breaking" and "pedestrian" are highly opinionated though. If there are many articles on this list, it may even be wise to merge that information into this list instead of having a separate article on each and every cellphone. --Pixelface 04:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Royan and Pixelface. This is neither a directory nor indiscriminate collection of information. It is a list of products, many of which are themselves notable, manufactured by a notable company, and serves as an index to encyclopedic articles, as well as being informative in itself, with copious annotation, about the types of products this company has offered in the past as well as what it offers now. Any products or product lines which are not particularly notable or don't have any information which can be sourced to reliable sources could be removed from the list, but this would still leave a valid list of many notable and significant ones. Articles which can be improved should not be deleted (see WP:RUBBISH). DHowell 05:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Same reasoning as for AfD of Motorola products.  See there for detailed argument.  Highlights include: Compliant with WP:LIST; provides information beyond a category; provides structure and navigation; clear inclusion criteria.  — DragonHawk (talk|hist) 14:23, 30 August 2007 (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.