Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of online trading platforms

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 draftify. Daniel (talk) 23:09, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of online trading platforms

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

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

Wikipedia is not a comparison website GloriaJFM (talk) 19:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:SYNTH, anyone? Mlb96 (talk) 02:14, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: Nominator has been blocked for sockpuppetry. ✗plicit 13:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Extremely strong keep per WP:SNOW. Ping me if you want me to give more detail about why nom is wrong here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Universe (talk • contribs) 21:35, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:10, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. While the nominator might be a sockpuppet, they are unfortunately correct about this article (probably a "good" edit to disguise bad edits). This isn't the right way to think about online trading platforms and is a bizarre bit of OR. There are valid "Comparison of XYZ" articles on Wikipedia (e.g. Comparison of web browsers), but this is not one of them because it's charts of irrelevant things that can't be reduced to yes/no and is hard to reference, unlike simple valid material for a chart like "is this open source or proprietary code". SnowFire (talk) 01:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify per Jumpytoo. Maintainer seems as if they're interested in fixing the issues on talk page, so while I don't think the current article works, it's possible a future article could fix them. SnowFire (talk) 16:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I also replied to existing AfD comments on Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Comparison_of_online_trading_platforms Jasonkhanlar (talk) 06:59, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify I think this could be a valid article, but in its current state it's not ready for mainspace (most of the rows not filled in, inconsistent columns...). Draftify it until the tables are filled in. Jumpytoo Talk 07:35, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: There are a lot of rows that need to be filled in. Definitely WP:TOOSOON to become an article. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 09:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DRAFTIFY I'm not knowledgeable enough about online trading platforms to be able to say if this is a reasonable article to have, but I don't know that there is anything wrong with "comparison of X" articles (such as comparison of web browsers, comparison of BitTorrent clients, and comparison of programming languages) per se. That being said, this is hopelessly incomplete at present. Incubating in draftspace seems like a sensible solution for now. TompaDompa (talk) 15:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify At the very least, this is a woefully incomplete article that is not ready for prime time. Whether the more serous issues of WP:OR and WP:N are applicable cannot be addressed until there is an actual article worth evaluating. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:18, 28 July 2021 (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.