Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ZX Spectrum clones


 * 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 No Consensus. Runcorn 20:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

List of ZX Spectrum clones

 * — (View AfD)

2 years and nothing more than a Mere collections of internal links, Fails;Wikipedia is not a repository of links' Wikipedia is not a directory and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information --Hu12 22:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per nom. Charlie 22:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Chairman S. Talk Contribs 22:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - a list of red links is useful for the creation of future articles. --- RockMFR 01:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup per my comment on Talk:List of ZX Spectrum clones. I've put a concrete suggestion for how to turn this list into a reasonable article there, and am vaguely disappointed the nominator hasn't even replied to that. As noted there, I don't have time to do anything with this before this AfD will close, so can I request a copy placed in my userspace if it is deleted. --Pak21 08:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I am also disappointed the nominator removed the cleanup tag I placed on the article. --Pak21 08:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: According to the history, A year has already past since your first edit to this "list" and no "concrete" changes or attempts have been made by you in that time to make this encyclopedic in any way. Why should we expect any different in the future. It still remains a Mere collections of internal links. This topic already has a (self-maintaining) category "ZX Spectrum clones", and serves the existing articles better being listed there. Replacing a prod tag with a cleanup tag without any corrective actions to the article and claiming you'll get around to next year does not change the fact this article fails inclusion criteria for Wikipedia. --Hu12 10:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The nomination has no basis. This article is a structured list, and structured lists are specifically noted as an exception to the "Wikipedia articles are not mere collections of internal links." policy.  The article is clearly not a directory of businesses or people; it is a list of personal computer models that satisfy a specific criterion, namely that they were clones of one specific type of personal computer.  And that criterion is why the list is not indiscriminate, too.  "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information." is not an indiscriminate criterion for deletion.  It is not a cosy catch-all shorthand for "I think that this article should be deleted.". The only real problem with the article is that the red-links provide temptation to create perpetual stubs.  The proper way to develop this list is to add the descriptions to this list, and only give break-out articles to those computer models that actually have enough source material to warrant them.  That is, however, a simple matter of cleanup (de-linking the redlinked names), and is not solved by deleting the article. Uncle G 10:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The List guideline requires that lists be a valuable information source and specifically notes "This is particularly the case for a structured list", List of ZX Spectrum clones does not meet this requirement and is in fact a duplicate (in article form) of a catagory with the same information. see: Category:ZX Spectrum clones. FWIW, in order to be exempt from "Mere collections of internal links" it would need to "assist with the organisation of articles" it clearly does not because Category:ZX Spectrum clones satisfies that Purpose. Aside from the numerous problems such as red-link, perpetual stubs, spam attraction, maintenance and cleanups List of ZX Spectrum clones creates, Category:ZX Spectrum clones is self-maintaining and ensures articles listed have enough source material to warrant their inclusion.--Hu12 13:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete --Hu12 10:37, 22 December 2006 (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.