Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital signage product comparison

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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Digital signage product comparison

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

Created in 2009 by an apparent WP:SPA, many more SPAs have since flocked here and laid claim (and probably more than a handful of well-intentioned editors doing cleanup/maintenance). Very few, if any, of these products are notable, WP is not a directory, nor a catalog, none of the info is referenced, the list goes on. There is no amount of modification or annotation that will make this topic meet inclusion criteria. It is an impressive collection of spam, but it is spam nonetheless. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 06:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a (comparison) list article. Does it need a rename?Curb Chain (talk) 08:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be included in a comparison article, the entry needs a WP page (see office suite for an example), otherwise it just turns into a big spam/link party. This page is all spam, written by the people who make the programs (literally, look at the history). There is nothing of value to anyone who is not shopping for these non-notable products, and that is not the sort of material we want to be hosting. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 23:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. None of these products appear notable. The combined list or table of them is also not found in any secondary or independent source. It's simply a copy of [1] from AMD's site, which is primary source for this article. FuFoFuEd (talk) 00:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's allowable to create a list or table that is not found elsewhere, c.f., WP:TABLES#When tables are appropriate, especially the sports and discography examples. We're allowed to arrange any facts we like into an article; we just can't synthesize anything new except the arrangement as explained at WP:SYN. Msnicki (talk) 00:47, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We have an article on Digital signage, which appears to offer appropriate WP:NPOV encyclopedic coverage of the underlying subject. If each of the products in this table had associated articles establishing their individual notabilities, a table comparing them would make sense. But those articles don't exist and I'm not prepared to assume any of them are notable. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion WP:NOTADVERTISING and it's not a catalog WP:NOTCATALOG. Msnicki (talk) 00:47, 27 May 2011 (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.