Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional companies (4th nomination)


 * 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   delete. That an article ahs been nominated before- in this case, almost three years prior is no reason to keep something around, as consensus can and does change. The standards of 2010 are thankfully, higher than those of 2007. The consensus here is that this list is an indiscriminate collection of trivia. Courcelles 03:48, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

List of fictional companies
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unencyclopedic. No criterion for inclusion. Almost no sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 05:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. How it's survived all those previous nominations is a mystery. A potentially endless list given that almost every fiction book, every film and every TV show could have a few fictional companies in it. Notable fictional companies are better served by the categories, there's no need for this list. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 06:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. There's also List of fictional law firms, List of Middle-earth inns, List of fictional radio stations, List of fictional television stations ... East of Borschov 07:28, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, lets talk about that radio stations one for a start....Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 07:58, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ...and that one about the inns of middle earth... Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 19:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Hopeless trivia. The fact that an author makes up the name of a company does not make it notable. You might as well have a list of fictional chairs. Every time a fictional character sits down another can be added to the list. Kitfoxxe (talk) 11:33, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - This article started back at the dawn of Wikipedia, in 2003, and has been worked on by dozens of editors over the years. I don't personally see the use of the article myself, but clearly others do. There are scores of in-links showing. Maybe it would be a useful navigational tool for someone writing a paper on a literary topic, I dunno... In any event, the criteria for inclusion, companies created in fiction seems clear enough and I can't see a good reason to disrespect so much work by so many for so long by deleting this list. Carrite (talk) 15:52, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - This article passed AfD muster twice in 2007 with KEEP results. Carrite (talk) 15:54, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Just being mentioned in a notable work of fiction does not make some fictional company notable. Appears to be an indiscriminate listing and a directory of trivia. Many of the entries appear to be bluelinks, but in fact only link to the fictional work. Almost every fictional writing, TV show or movie includes some fictional companies. Even though it was kept in previous AFDs, consensus can change. Edison (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —  Chris! c / t 19:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete 100% pure trivia. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:34, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wikia Annex. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 04:40, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fictional companies are very common; listing them is nothing but unconnected trivia. – sgeureka t•c 17:22, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The only argument made, so far, for keeping it is that it has been around for a long time.  Uh, so what?  As others have said, how it survived the other AfDs is a mystery.  List of fictional law firms should be next. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  23:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The objections raised to this list would best be solved by setting standards for it and winnowing it to demonstrably notable examples. To delete it would absurdly suggest that there is no such thing as a notable fictional company. Furthermore, the tactic of renominating arguments for deletion until the community supportive of their existence is caught unaware is undignified. This article is not a hoax, nor does it cover inherently non-notable subject matter. bd2412  T 16:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I don't see anything non-trivial about it, to the contrary, I would say that fictional companies are inherently non-notable until they demonstrate otherwise. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 21:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. This is not 2007, and WP is neither a directory or a list of indiscriminate information.  This list is a collection of trivia. Karanacs (talk) 14:31, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This is not 2007, and we have by now a well established practice of keeping articles like this. It is not indiscriminate, because its limited to companies in notable  works of fiction; if it is not indiscriminate, it can not be a directory--the characteristic of a directory is includes everything.  If a company in a work of fiction is important enough to be mentioned in the article in any way that relates to the story, it belongs here. If it's just a place a character walks by, then it doesn't--unless it is an allusion which has actually been noticed by a secondary source.  That's the same criterion of relevance for inclusion in the articles.    DGG ( talk ) 01:07, 24 September 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.