Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Collectors market index (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. The arguments are all based in policy, but with 2 for deletion and 1 (plus what is essentially an unstated keep) there's just no consensus here. I suggest reframing as suggested in the last comments, and returning to AfD if that does not solve the issues described. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:42, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Collectors market index

[edit]
AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Collectors market index (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The term appears to be a wiki-invention, not used in any sources outside Wikipedia and its forks. It fails WP:OR and WP:GNG. If this was to be considered a list, it would fail WP:LISTN. Lastly, by linking to some companies providing some valuation servies, this is possibly promotional (and heavily relies on WP:PRIMARY sources). Because no source actually covers this concept, I am afraid merger doesn't make sense. Previous AfD noted that the topic is discussed in one source (although apparently under a different, unspecificed name). If such, we should identify such a name and add a section to Collecting. The mess here is unfortunately WP:TNTable. PS. In the context I am somewhat familiar with, i.e. CCGs, the term used is price guide, and that apparently redirects to a short section Collecting#Value_of_collected_items. So the concept won't be lost from Wikipedia - we just need to clean up this poorly written fork/OR. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment This kind of index is common in financial circles and doing a search on only the HAGERTY collector car indices I found some references that could be have some use for the article, [1] [2] and [3]. The references do show that the indices are used outside wiki. Would a rewrite and a possible name change fix the page's issues?
KeepItGoingForward (talk) 23:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible some of these indices have stand-alone notability. I'd suggest considering splitting and stubbing any that are, if you find sufficient sources for that (and linking them from collecting#value section). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:00, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@KeepItGoingForward PS. Of course, if you find sources about the very topic, a rewrite could, in theory, fix the issues. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My suggestion is to rename the page to, "Collectors market indices" and have a list of the notable indices with their description. KeepItGoingForward (talk) 09:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The term might be used in The Handbook of Alternative Assets, but it's the only work that pops up in my BEFORE. So we have so far found one source where the concept might be discussed. This is still not at the level of meeting GNG, I am afraid. So far I stand by my view that the best WP:ATD is a redirect to the Collecting article, as I mentioned in my OP. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Moving the list of indexes to the collecting article sounds to be a good idea. KeepItGoingForward (talk) 22:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 19:05, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously closed as WP:NPASR, so relisting upon request. This article is ineligible for soft deletion as it has previously survived AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Given lack of participation, I'll ping editors who participated in the first AfD: User:GermanJoe, User:Spinningspark. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Thanks for the ping. I haven't changed my position since the last AFD. First of all, the nom is mistaken on one point. A market index is not the same as a price guide. It is an economic indicator analogous to a stock market index but for a particular asset, in our case, a particular collectible. I don't think we should get hung up on the lack of a collective name for these indices in sources. I would view the title as descriptive rather than a term of art. The fact that The Handbook of Alternative Assets has gathered together many of these indices in one book (including most that are in our article) is enough to justify a list article on Wikipedia in my opinion. And that's how we should be treating this page – as a list-plus page rather than a full article.
I don't think that the suggestion of breaking out the notable indices into separate articles has anything going for it. I doubt that any of them are notable enough for a stand-alone page. For instance, The Compleat Collector has non-trivial coverage of "Market Bradex" (a market index for collectible plates), but it's not enough to build an article. However, there is more than enough information out there to collectively build a page on these indices. And by the way, the Bradex is currently missing from the page. SpinningSpark 11:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'm getting better results using "collectible market index" as a search term (which would also make a better title). It turned up this magazine article which definitely discusses these market indices as a group. It also found "The mathematics of building a stamp imdex", a substantial piece on creating a market index from the book Collectible Investments for the High Net Worth Investor. While that may sound overly specific, the treatment is quite general and is based on techniques used in earlier work by other researchers on house price indices. Adding some of that to the article would definitely make it article-like rather than list-like. SpinningSpark 11:36, 2 January 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Collectors_market_index_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1132402967"