Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of companies in the Chicago metropolitan area


 * 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. (non-admin closure) — Yashtalk stalk 04:54, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

List of companies in the Chicago metropolitan area

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTDIRECTORY #7, simple listing of businesses. Could easily develop into unnecessary WP:LISTCRUFT. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - There is already a category for this, and no reason to have an article that merely duplicates the cat. Besides that, Wikipedia is not the yellow pages, and with a metro area of 10 million people, this is already too long to be useful, and would be even more so if complete. Timothy Joseph Wood  15:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is WP:NOTPAPER, and we can WP:SPLIT lists that become too large to fit in a single page. Size has never been a reason to remove content. Diego (talk) 09:46, 25 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:CLN and, in terms of the !vote directly above, WP:NOTDUP. A perfectly viable list that complements but in no way replaces Category:Companies based in Chicago. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:CLN, WP:PURPOSE as a navigational aid, WP:NOTDUP, and all the other reasons why the similar List of businesses in Omaha discussion is going to be closed as a snowball keep. This is not a "simple listing of businesses", it's a list to existing Wikipedia articles for notable businesses, i.e. the kind that is allowed per WP:CSC. Diego (talk) 09:42, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per my comments at Articles for deletion/List of businesses in Omaha. There is nothing encyclopaedic about a list as indiscriminate as this one. Thryduulf (talk) 10:57, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There's nothing indiscriminate about a list of links to articles with a well-defined criterion: notable companies in the Chicago metropolitan area. Diego (talk) 11:08, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a list of companies that are notable for many reasons, most of which have little or nothing to do with where they are based, that happen to be (partly) located in an area that, according to it's article, has no single agreed definition. If this were restricted to one of the definitions and to those companies about which their being in that area rather than any other is a relevant factor in their notability then I would happily support the list. As it stands it's just an arbitrary subdivision of a list of companies with a Wikipedia article - or in other words a business directory and a simple listing of loosely connected entities. Thryduulf (talk) 11:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * As you said yourself, Chicago metropolitan area is a notable topic, as well as Economy of Chicago and all the companies listed here; a little imprecision in how to define the area would at most merit discussing the inclusion of a couple unclear entries at the list's talk page, not deleting the whole list. Per WP:LISTN, lists that fulfill recognized informational and navigation purposes like this one often are kept, and we have as examples List of businesses in Omaha, List of companies based in Seattle, List of companies in the Dallas–Fort Worth metroplex or any other of the Category:Lists of companies of the United States by state, that don't differ from this one in anything significant. If you want to delete this based on an interpretation of WP:NOT, you'd have to open a community discussion that covered all them, not delete them one by one. Diego (talk) 12:03, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I nominated List of businesses in Omaha for deletion under the impression it was the only one of it's type (it's the only one named "businesses" rather than "companies", if both are kept (and I still think they shouldn't be) then a common naming scheme should be considered) and as my nomination statement there shows I fully believe that WP:NOTDIRECTORY points 3, 4 and 7 clearly mean that these "Simple listings without context information" that are "directories" and "Yellow Pages" (although my interpretation of them as this has been explicitly challenged) without the need for a further discussion. Just because Y is a notable area does not mean that a list of X in Y is automatically encyclopaedic. Thryduulf (talk) 14:24, 25 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep A well-organized list of notable businesses in a well-defined area. This is exactly what lists are for. Per the editing guideline WP:CLN, lists and categories are intended to co-exist and "these methods should not be considered in conflict with each other. Rather, they are synergistic, each one complementing the others." Irrational fears inspired by the essay WP:LISTCRUFT are hardly a justification for deletion; for that matter, *every* list must be deleted lest LISTCRUFT become a problem once we take this to its illogical conclusion. Alansohn (talk) 16:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep for the same reasons I gave in Articles for deletion/List of businesses in Omaha. I don't think an article shoould be deleted because it could run counter to an essay (as opposed to actually running counter to a guideline or policy, which this one does not). Smmurphy(Talk) 19:32, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I did explicitly cite a guideline, as well as an essay, in the nomination. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep – Qualifies for an article per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Companies based in Chicago. Also qualifies as a functional navigational aid per WP:LISTPURP. This latter point is evidenced in part by the 15,702 page views the article has received in the last thirty days as of this post. Conversely, the Category:Companies based in Chicago page has only received 985 page views in the last thirty days as of this post. North America1000 03:45, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I am sure there was a time when this would have been speedily deleted, but it seems these lists are in vogue.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The list is certainly not indiscriminate--it is limited to the ones that are notable enough to have WP articles. Lists and categories serve complementary functions--a category is automatically populated and very compact; a list however gives some indication of what the subject is. If you are want to look at articles of some particular type of companies in Chicago, a list lets you select them. If you don't know the exact name, a list helps you find it. If,, you are looking for potentially dubious articles, or articles worth upgrading,  a list helps you screen them DGG ( talk ) 16:42, 27 January 2017 (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.