Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of software companies


 * 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 of the debate was DELETE. Mo0 [ talk ] 06:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

List of software companies
WP:NOT a directory. Further, this page (and others like it, see Lists of companies for a ton more that may be deletion-worthy) are a magnet for link spammers and astroturfers. —Locke Cole 11:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * How does this page encourage astroturfing? Turnstep 23:07, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Because there is little to no verification of companies added to the list. See WP:CORP (and also see the contribs over the last few months; mostly anon IPs adding companies with external links in an attempt to pump up their PageRank most likely). —Locke Cole • t • c 04:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * WP:CORP is in regards to giving a company an article, not its use anywhere in Wikipedia. Further, if inappropriate entries are being added by anonymous IPs, they should be removed, same as any other article. I'm just not seeing a genuine reason for deletion here, unless one is categorically (pun intended) against all lists on Wikipedia, in which case a policy discussion is more appropriate. Turnstep 14:03, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So what would be the reason for including a company which is not sufficiently important tro qualify for an article of its own, given that WP:ISNOT a directory service, a collection of links or an indiscriminate collection of information? - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 14:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete—Locke Cole 11:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete uninformative, inexaustable listcruft -Doc ask? 11:35, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete exactly as nominator. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 13:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Ajwebb 17:44, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can definitely see this getting full of crap from random software companies.
 * Keep. I cannot see how this is any worse than List of vegetarians, and unlike that list, this is completely verifiable and arguably much more useful. This article goes back to September of 2003 and has undergone hundreds of edits, yet is still a small, manageable size: so what harm is it doing anyone? Turnstep 23:07, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep minus some redlinks. Gazpacho 01:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or did I miss the whole point of the category system? --Pboyd04 02:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No, you didn't. And the category system ensures that only companies with an article (and worthy of an article) are included. I'd be willing to bet that 75% of the companies listed right now don't reach the notability requirements of WP:CORP. —Locke Cole • t • c 04:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * delete per nom--Looper5920 10:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it. I think that this is useful information that should be kept for the sake of having accurate listings.  Just because you may not 'personally' find this information useful, someone else will.  One man's garbage is another man's gold.  --1901 23:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * User's first contrib. —Locke Cole • t • c 23:51, 2 January 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.