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 as indiscriminant collection of information. ((1 == 2) ? (('Stop') : ('Go')) 21:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Gateway products[edit]

List of Gateway products (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Unencyclopedic, unreferenced, aging list of Gateway products. Wikipedia is not a directory. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipeidia isn't an advertising medium. Mikeblas 22:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• weak delete This might be useful (which is not a reason to keep, per policy) and *could* be encyclopedic if it gave something besides just being a list. Lack of given referencing and "aging equipment" are not valid reasons to delete. I don't think this would qualify for a wp:not#directory delete either. I think the only legit arguement is the indiscriminate list issue. IMO, it would require a complete rewrite to keep, and would need to add references and additional context to the list, thus delete and if someone rewrote it properly and could satisfy those conditions, it could stick. Pharmboy 23:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, for reasons given by nominator. —tregoweth (talk) 23:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Jakew 23:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment You may wish to add Gateway monitors to this discussion. FrozenPurpleCube 00:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• While you're at it, you may also wish to add List of past Gateway products. I wonder how many other Gateway catalogs are out there – is there a way to add them to this discussion? I would say Delete them all. Eldar 00:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete put the notable ones in appropriate categories, but we're not a directory of gateway models Corpx 04:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 14:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: not encyclopedic; these lists likely exist elsewhere and are probably more complete (e.g., my Gateway laptop is not listed here—nor should I add it). +mt 16:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOT, especially since this list can be probably be found on Gateways website. --_{Hdt83 Chat} 20:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Rename it Gateway related topics like List of Microsoft topics they're no different in what they convey. Or break big lists down into more specific lists like Intel's seen here & here, or Apple's here for example. CaribDigita 23:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Better as a List in article or a category Mbisanz 06:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Compliant with WP:LIST. Provides information beyond a category; provides structure and navigation; clear inclusion criteria. Deletion policy/Brand name products seems to indicate that consensus is that lists of products are acceptable. If we want to change that (and maybe we should), start there, not by AfD'ing selected lists. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 14:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete because the only reason I could think of to keep is WP:ILIKEIT, which isn't good enough. spazure (contribs) (review) 08:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment On the other hand, not giving any particular reason to delete it — in particular, not addressing any of the various other arguments raised above — seems to me like WP:JUSTAVOTE.  :-) —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 12:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.