Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Most popular Android apps by number of downloads


 * 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   weak keep. I'm pretty close to no consensus here - the sources provided show that popular Android apps appear to be a notable topic, maybe not for an explicit ranking. But that hasn't received much discussion. Needing to be updated isn't a grounds for deletion, and the arguments so are wholly unconvincing. Basically the same is true of any list about something that continues to the present. Renaming should be considered at the page as an editorial decision. Wily D 06:53, 7 September 2012 (UTC) Since I was asked, note that WP:NOTYELLOW says we shouldn't include "Non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations"; i.e., random intersections where the intersection is of no important "List of blonde astronomers", "list of marxist chefs", etc. Note that in this case the sources (at least some) are specific to Android Apps, not apps in general, which is unsurprising as the platform an application runs on is generally relevant to that application. It isn't the case that we're doing the categorisation by platform, the sources are. Wily D 09:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Most popular Android apps by number of downloads

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Violation of WP:NOTPROMOTION. Nathan2055talk - contribs 01:30, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Amendment - As people have said, this is more a violation of WP:NOTYELLOW than of WP:NOTPROMOTION. --Nathan2055talk - contribs 17:49, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep If there was any other more comprehensive list for android applications, I might say to delete or merge this, but this page just about meets list requirements: it collects together android applications, which is a natural grouping of things; the topic of best-selling apps has received media coverage; the entries are generally notable (even though not all have articles just now, most are widely reviewed and new releases of Google Maps, Facebook Messenger, etc, get coverage in tech media); the criteria for list membership are clear (although there are issues about whether to include both free and paid, whether to include most-reviewed, etc). I don't see why this is promotional, any more than having a list of best-selling books, top-grossing films, etc, although there may be other grounds for deletion. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: unmaintainable and thus potentially misleading list, the topic is not encyclopedic (too time-sensitive). Violates WP:NOTYELLOW. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Rename to List of most downloaded Android applications jonkerz ♠talk 19:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC) - I do not think WP:NOTPROMOTION or WP:NOTYELLOW applies here; the promotional nature of this list is a by-product of what it is intended to do: list the most downloaded Andoid apps -- something I think is a notable subject. We have list for the best-selling PS2 games, best-selling album, highest-grossing films and many more. The problem with maintainability is somewhat bypassed by dividing the entries into "100 million installs or more" and "50 million installs or more" and not trying to list the exact numbers. Saying we can't have this list at all because it is hard to maintain is a little bit like throwing out the baby with the bath water. jonkerz ♠talk 22:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The existence of similar lists doesn't prove that any of them is warranted, and specifically says nothing about this one. The very concept of "Most popular X by Y" violates WP:NOTYELLOW, and the maintainability problems (at any given time the list is incomplete) are going to make the encyclopedic purpose of this list (if any) unreachable, leaving only promotional aspect. Sorry, but there is no baby in this water. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 22:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * [Apologies for the length of this comment] The title of this page should really be something like List of most downloaded Android applications, similar to:


 * List of most watched television broadcasts
 * List of most luminous stars
 * List of most visited art museums in the world
 * List of most expensive paintings


 * This is not invoking WP:OTHERSTUFF, this is illustrating that NOTYELLOW cannot be used indiscriminately against all "List of most..." articles. List of most expensive paintings is not a Yellow Pages for paintings. It is a notable and encyclopedic subject, and should therefore be kept.


 * Do you think that List of most downloaded mobile applications is a notable subject? I do, and by judging the results from searching for "most downloaded apps", it is a notable subject. If we can establish that it is, then splitting that list into List of most downloaded Android applications and List of most downloaded iOS applications comes naturally. That is what happened to List of best-selling video games which was split into multiple lists, such as List of best-selling PlayStation 2 video games. jonkerz ♠talk 19:05, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, all these topics are notable (in context of WP:GNG), but all of these are excluded per WP:NOTYELLOW. Your argument is indeed WP:OTHERSTUFF (or WP:INN, which is essentially the same, though focuses on notability), as the fact of those articles' existence indeed says nothing about their compatibility with WP:NOTYELLOW. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 21:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Rename to List of most downloaded Android applications per jonkerz well thoughtout comments. However, I'm having trouble with the sourcing. The sourcing in the article is not independent of the subject, so the topic fails WP:GNG if you look only at the sourcing in the article. Looking outside the article to see whether any reliable source cares about the topic, I wasn't able to find an WP:GNG sources directly addressing the topic. However, I found Android Marketplace Tops 10 Billion App Downloads, Most Downloaded Android Real Estate Search App Featured at International Developer Event, Angry Birds for Android downloaded over 30 million times, 10 billion applications downloaded from the Android Market, Survey finds Android users more likely to be app freeloaders, No end to pursuit of appiness These show a general interest in Android app downloads, but not in a ranking by number of downloads. I tried finding reliable source articles that include some of the apps listed under "100 million installs or more" in the Wikipedia article. If there were such an article, the writer probably would have provided their ranking in downloads. I didn't find such an article that include a download ranking. In a search for an article with Tiny Flashlight, Angry Birds, and Fruit Ninja, I found only Be warned - there's no such thing as a free app, which didn't rank the apps. Wikipedia should not be the originator of any topic. However, it seems that Wikipedia is the originator of the topic, "List of most downloaded Android applications." -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 05:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 09:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete We don't need a trivial list like this that will require constant updating. A boat   that can float!   (watch me float!)  10:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - Renaming does sound like a better option than deleting. --Nathan2055talk - contribs 14:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per above. MaNeMeBasat (talk) 12:06, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep and consider a title change. This is parallel to other long-accepted articles. How else are we to write about the subject? This is more objective than, say List of significant android apps."That something will require frequent updating is not a reason for deletion, or any popular contemporary subject would have to be deleted.  DGG ( talk ) 01:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "How else are we to write about the subject?" That is not our task – plenty of news media out there are trying to do so this or that way. We are expected to write on subjects with long-term notability, and this kind of list (buzzword-based, instantly outdated, based on arbitrary thresholds, recentist in essence) is incompatible with this task. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 02:17, 7 September 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.