Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping sites


 * 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. The consensus seems to be that, even if only notable online shopping sites are included, the list will be far too broad to be of any value. Additionally, there are concerns that this is too similar to the recently deleted List of online stores. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 16:36, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

List of shopping sites

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

I'm not sure what the value of this list is. We already have a number of categories (that themselves need to be cleaned up), but trying to maintain a list including which products are sold and which countries are served just seems like a guarantee that this is going to be always out of date. KarlB (talk) 02:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete for the same reasons as described in Articles for deletion/List of online stores, plus the fact that this list isn't clearly distinguishable from that list. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:04, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 08:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 08:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep What is intended of course, is list of notable  shopping sites, and it is just as important now as it would have been when there were only a very few of them. More valuable actually; the red-linked ones need examination to see if there should be an article, and removed if not clearly notable. Strange pair of arguments for deletion: first, that there will be additional entries (there will never be reason to remove them, because once notable the site remains notable no matter what happens to it, and that since this group is very notable and very well known, the list is not encyclopedic. And there seems to be an argument we should merge the two lists because of overlap, but that's a argument for keep and merge; it also doesn't fit well with the argument for deletion at the other list, that it is already too broad. DGG ( talk ) 05:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - The criteria of the article has been changed to "This is a list of notable shopping sites" in the article's lead section. As such, the list has a discriminate focus, and serves to provide information about the sites as well as serving as a useful navigation guide for Wikipedia articles. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * delete. This list (and the other one, which I can't tell the difference between) purports to list the contents of these categories:
 * Category:Online retailers 82
 * Category:Online retail companies by country 339
 * Category:Book selling websites 38
 * Category:Online music stores 105
 * Category:Online grocers 18
 * Category:Commerce websites 181
 * Category:Online music stores 105
 * If we add this up, it is about 868 articles which could conceivably be placed here. This does not even count *other* retailers which do some form of business online, allowing one to buy gift cards, mobile phone minutes, groceries, etc. I think it would be much more valuable to spend time sorting out the categories that exist, than to try to spend time maintaining this list which should technically have over 800 items in it. Finally the attempt to centrally catalogue what these sites sell, and where they sell to, is not encyclopedic or worth of a separate list; the list of items sold by any of these stores will change constantly; for example, 1-800 flowers, which is on both lists, doesn't only sell flowers; and the Amazon description of 'everything' is a great use of that term for marketing purposes, but also inaccurate; we might say amazon sells *a lot* of things, but they don't sell 'everything'. Thus, this list is too broad; and the categories suffice; I think a more interesting list might be notable retailers who do *not* have an online shopping available, since that is becoming more and more rare these days. --KarlB (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - However, per WP:NOTDUP, "It is neither improper nor uncommon to simultaneously have a category, a list, and a navigation template which all cover the same topic. These redundant systems of organizing information are considered to be complementary, not inappropriately duplicative. Furthermore, arguing that a category duplicates a list (or vice versa) at a deletion discussion is not a valid reason for deletion and should be avoided." Northamerica1000(talk) 17:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Too broad. I really have to wonder how seriously to take wanting to keep both this and Articles for deletion/List of online stores. One or the other, maybe, sure, everyone's entitled to their opinion and all. But both? Really? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep A list of notable entries which go hand-in-hand with the categories, per WP:CLN.  Lugnuts  (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Too broad in scope for a discriminate list to emerge from the criteria for inclusion. Not all appropriate categories make for appropriate list articles.  Them From  Space  16:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - This relatively new list is a close duplicate of List of online stores, with the only real difference being a few red links. I favor keeping the original list but see no reason to retain this one. Most of the comments in this discussion seem to have been copy-pasted from Articles for deletion/List of online stores; while the same arguments may apply, we must take into account the overarching consideration of duplication. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → B  music  ian  01:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This is a prime example of WP:LISTCRUFT. My primary issue: #6. The list is unlimited and/or unmaintainable, and #1. The list was created just for the sake of having such a list. Now, if it were a list of the 100/1000 (whatever) largest online retailers, OK, but he only requirement for inclusion is notability.  It's WAY too broad, hence, it's essentially unlimited.  Roodog2k (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as a broad, unlimited list with unclear criteria considering that most stores sells online. Secret account 02:19, 28 May 2012 (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.