Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cooperatives


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:54, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

List of cooperatives

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Adds no information to Category:Cooperatives by country except for additions which are WP:Original research, lack WP:Notability and breach policy on WP:External links. Fayenatic (talk) 21:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Categories are inferior to lists in several respects and so do not supersede them - see WP:CLS. Colonel Warden (talk) 06:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I am generally a defender of lists, but in what way is this one superior to the corresponding category? - Fayenatic (talk) 07:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - In its full form something like this would be vast. I would encourage some sort of inclusion criteria and the division of this list into a number of national lists. Carrite (talk) 15:51, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Nothing wrong with this list that a little rescue and clean-up will take care of. Strengthening the lead and inclusion criteria to limit list entries to notable (with WP articles) cooperatives and the removal of all entries that are merely links to websites or not sourced will bring this into line with WP:SAL very nicely.--Mike Cline (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Mike Cline (talk) 15:56, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIR, criterion #4. Were this list ever completed (assuming it is completable), it would be gargantuan and unmaintainable.  The list is 100% redundant with Category:Cooperatives by country, therefore no new information is introduced in this article, and it doesn't make Wikipedia easier to navigate.  Snotty Wong   spill the beans 17:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * SW – Do you concur that changes underway for this list have negated the WP:NOTDIR argument? Plus do you acknowledge that there is strong consensus Here that WP:CLN allows list/category duplication and as such, the redundancy of a list/category is not a valid reason for deletion?--Mike Cline (talk) 02:19, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Very reasonable, it includes not all cooperatives in the world, but only those notable enough to have Wikipedia articles. It is therefore not indiscriminate, but as discriminating as anything else in Wikipedia. The word  and criterion "notable" is assumed--there's been a decision not to include the word in the title (personally, I'm not sure it was the right decision, for it would avoid arguments over articles like this, but it is our practice.) .  Lists and categories are not redundant--they each have their advantages. This one, for example, includes the city & the nature of the co-op, which the category can not. The EL's, of course, are what provide the sources--one cannot argue simultaneously that it is OR and has links for WP:V.     DGG ( talk ) 01:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability is the inclusion criterion. Per Categories, lists, and navigation templates, we can have categories, and lists too. Peter Karlsen (talk) 02:07, 24 October 2010 (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.