Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of PLC manufacturers


 * 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. Numerically, the discussion is divided, but only the nominator presented a substantive argument, and based their criticism purely on the current state of the list rather than its potential. And edits since the nomination have already mooted that criticism. postdlf (talk) 15:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

List of PLC manufacturers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTDIR. This is a simple business directory, with no encyclopedic scope or additional annotation. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * (post close comment) Given that the closer seems happy to mind-read the nominator, can I please clarify here that the list still has no sourcing, no encyclopedic content beyond listing names and still warrants deletion. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 02:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTDIR. Pburka (talk) 03:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Why nominate for deletion when you can simply add the items that you believe are missing on this list to make it encyclopedic? Why discard a list that 118 distinct authors have contributed to? Ottawahitech (talk) 12:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Question to Andy Dingley and User:Pburka can you please be more specific about WP:NOTDIR: which section  are you relying on as a reason for deleting this article? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no encyclopedic content in this article beyond the bare listing of company names. There is no external referencing. Most of the names here aren't even linked. Just what useful information does that convey to the reader of an encyclopedia? Andy Dingley (talk) 22:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Me5000 cleaned up the list and I have added a short description for each item on the remaining  list. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)     ... and  BTW this list has been viewed 6095 times in the last 90 days (see talkpage). Ottawahitech (talk) 09:07, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 23:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep I removed all advertising and anything that didn't have a wikipedia article. There are many lists on Wikipedia as long as it contains links to wikipedia articles I don't see a problem. Me5000 (talk) 00:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:48, 2 September 2015 (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.