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 keep. postdlf (talk) 16:37, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of commodity traders[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PROD was removed without explanation. I believe this is a case of WP:LISTCRUFT. There is no context to this list - there is already a category which will suffice. Orphaned, nothing reaches here anyway Gbawden (talk) 06:33, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nominator seems to dislike lists as a matter of principle but this is not our policy. WP:CLN explains that "these methods should not be considered in conflict with each other. Rather, they are synergistic, each one complementing the others. ... Therefore, the "category camp" should not delete or dismantle Wikipedia's lists". Note that the topic is notable per WP:LISTN as there are entire books such as Chalmin, Philippe (1987), Traders and Merchants: Panorama of International Commodity Trading, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 9783718604357 which document it in detail. Andrew (talk) 08:51, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:01, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:02, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NOTDUP. List articles are complementary to categories and navigation templates, not inappropriately duplicative. This qualifies for an article per the existence of Category:Commodities traders. Also per WP:NOTDUP, "...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." Furthermore, the list provides a useful navigation aid per WP:LISTPURP. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:40, 20 September 2014 (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.