Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of social enterprises


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 01:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

List of social enterprises

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Topic is too broad. As per Appropriate topics for lists, lists should not be too broad. No country, type of activity, achievement or such category included in article title. There can be charitable or non-profit or for-profit social enterprises. Anybody doing something for the society can be considered as social enterprise. Nomination for PROD contested stating that this is only for notable enterprises. There are thousands of notable Social enterprises around the world. List does not add value. VasuVR ( talk,  contribs ) 01:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as unmaintainably broad and unnecessary.  Graymornings (talk) 01:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom and above.*Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I could see a value here. We already have an article with regards to social enterprise.  Why not have a list starting with the more notable.   As for deletion in that the list is to broad, lets take the advice the guidelines give “…try to limit the scope in some way (by product category, by country, by date, etc.). This is best done by sectioning the general page under categories. When entries in a category have grown enough to warrant a fresh list-article, they can be moved out to a new page, and be replaced by a See new list link. When all categories become links to lists, the page becomes a list repository or "List of lists" and the entries can be displayed as a bulleted list.”  In fact my reading of the guidelines I’m giving the impression that it mandates that we start such a list.  Thanks ShoesssS Talk 02:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. What would you consider more notable, that you have mentioned above? In the same line of thinking shall we start List of brand names, List of footballers, List of lakes, etc. A category Social enterprise is more appropriate, as the list does not add value. VasuVR  ( talk,  contribs ) 11:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think you might have missed me saying start with the more notable. If an organization - company - enterprise - charity is  considered a social enterprise and it is notable, as to our guideline, yes they should be on the list.  I used the term more as just a starting place, not as exclusion or inclusion.  notable is notable :-).    Regarding the rest of your question, I believe DGG explains it better than me.Thanks ShoesssS Talk 14:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep If limited to those with notability in wp, I think it's tenable. A list can always add value if some information (e.e.g. country, dates) are given, and even without, it is no less valuable than a category. I think List of lakes, suitably divided geographically, would be a good idea. A list of brand names with n indication of what the product and the company is & geographic area and time would be extremely valuable--I hope someone does the work. But how are these comparisons--the problem with both is size, and this is a fairly short list. DGG (talk) 11:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep — the list looks like it just started. If need be when the list gets too large and unmaintainable. It can be split into separate lists from there. Otherwise, this list is doable. MuZemike  ( talk ) 18:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 'Delete. A list of Social Enterprises is best dealt with by our categorization system.   As it currently stands this list is out of keeping with our style guidelines and has already encouraged inappropriate promotion by people using it as a directory to link to their favorite orgs.  There's no value added to Wikipedia by this article that can't be better provided through the use of categories. -- SiobhanHansa 15:41, 25 December 2008 (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.