Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of open access projects


 * 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. Either keep (and cleanup) or merge remain options for further discussion.  Sandstein  15:44, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

List of open access projects

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a directory, with no sources, just external links. It'd be a pity if WP editors were to waste any time salvaging the content herein instead of spending their time more constructively adding sourced material in existing articles. Fgnievinski (talk) 15:17, 8 January 2015 (UTC) Fgnievinski (talk) 15:17, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: WP is not OAD (Open Access Directory, an "open-access, wiki-based, community-updated encyclopedia of OA factual lists"). Fgnievinski (talk) 15:23, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Keep - this is a list page so it naturally looks/feels like a directory. Mergers could be a good way to prevent information duplication, but this is also a unique list on its own. OR drohowa (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge or clean up - A lot of sections have specfic subarticles to merge to; the rest might be merged to open access. The number of external links might be cut down if we have an external directory we can point to, but it would be nice to list at least the types of open access projects that exist in the world. -- Beland (talk) 18:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Such directories are already linked from Open access. WP articles should list primarily WP content. Fgnievinski (talk) 21:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  21:50, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  21:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge with Open access. SamuelDay1 (talk) 17:44, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean up. The internal external links for entities that have no Wikipedia article are the biggest problem; they should either be converted to redlinks with references (as I've done here, for example), or removed from the list if they are not notable. Some reorganizing could help too. However, this should not be merged with open access, which is already a long article; see WP:SUMMARY -Pete (talk) 22:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Non notable can be removed and the notable one should be added with a summary, after that we won't have to merge. SamuelDay1 (talk) 04:58, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 01:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep with caveat. This page does satisfy the notability criteria for stand-alone lists as the list topic has been discussed as a group . The external links to the various databases should be removed (or judiciously converted into redlinks), but WP:NOTDIRECTORY does not prohibit links to articles already covered, thus the list should be kept. Oppose merge per Pete. Altamel (talk) 02:46, 17 January 2015 (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.