Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of public relations firms


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 07:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

List of public relations firms
WP is not an indiscriminate set of lists, and there is a perfectly good category available. &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 03:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, as I stated in the talk page, the list is a valid list per WP:LISTS for development purposes. Firms listed do not seem indiscriminate, they do appear to be notable from what little Googling I've done. hateless 07:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Doczilla 08:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Listcruft. Viridae Talk 10:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - at least one article links here. What the passionate anti-listers oft times forget is that lists are useful as part of the wiki web. List has a clear, well defined purpose. WilyD 12:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. What's the point of a list when a perfectly good category exists? Imparts no new useful information apart from introducing a few more red-linked names. Ohconfucius 12:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete has no room for expansion to supercede the capabilities of a category, and it has the potential to get dirtied with dozens of small-time, non-notable firms. AdamBiswanger1 13:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per AdamBiswanger1. Sorry, but I can't see the list has a clear, well-defined purpose apart from poorly duplicating the work of a category (see the entry for Edelman). It's highly US-centric too, so cleanup is necessary if it's kept. The one other page that links to it is Public Relations via a "see also" link, so it isn't going to cause major disruption if it is deleted. Yomangani 14:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Some lists have value on wikipedia.  This is not one of those lists.  -- stubblyh ea d | T/c 15:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It has useful redlinks. Once those are stubbed out, deletion is fine. Deco 22:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Redlinks, if not exist anywhere else in wikipedia independently, mean nothing. Mukadderat 19:10, 13 August 2006 (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.