Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of books on the history of computing


 * 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   Move to WikiProject Computing/List of books on the history of computing.

List of books on the history of computing

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fundamentally fails WP:NOT. We're not here to provide directories, lists with no context, personal reading recommendations, etc. DreamGuy (talk) 17:57, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Certainly fails WP:NOT. Criteria is too subjective. Is it just about hardware? Software? Both? Attachments? Niteshift36 (talk) 18:02, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I started this article nearly four years ago because there was so much duplocation of the references between History of computing and History of computing hardware. My idea was to collect all of the references in one place to avoid duplication.  But the policy is to have the references in both articles.  Since I last worked on the article it has been expanded greatly.  There may not be a need for the article - I need to check the references on those two articles.  The second of those two articles seems to be well-referneced but the first one may need some of these books for references.  Bubba73 (talk), 21:16, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Uncle G, below. or as a last resort - Move to subpage of WikiProject Computing. Moving it to wikiproject namespace would be much better than deleting it outright, if they're interested. I've left a note at the project's talkpage. -- Quiddity (talk) 03:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC) Changed to keep at 18:48, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I think the move is a good idea - people put in a lot of work on it and the information will be useful to people in the project. Bubba73 (talk), 03:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to subpage of WikiProject Computing - Although the list is not appropriate as an article, it is useful to that project. Rilak (talk) 07:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete because its too indiscriminate. I dont oppose a userfy.  I dont believe an encyclopedia is the place to index books by topic Corpx (talk) 09:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to subpage of Wikiproject Computing.but this must not remain an article, regardless. there should be zero titles without articles on a list like this, otherwise its a research tool for CREATING wp articles, not a wp article itself. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:34, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * We put further reading sections into articles. Such content most definitely is within the remit of article content. Uncle G (talk) 09:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not indscriminate. It has quite clear boundaries for inclusion.  And it's a bibliography, just like all of the other bibliographies that we have in Category:Bibliographies by subject.  Is there a good reason for taking this bibliography away from readers other than "I didn't know that we provided reading information and bibliographies in article space."? Uncle G (talk) 09:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * keep I don't see how it could be considered "indiscriminate" - it is books on the history of computers and computing. It is even categorized.  Bubba73 (talk), 17:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Educational and informative content for which there are good alternatives to deletion, as discussed above. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:34, 2 July 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.