Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of district heating systems

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. ✗plicit 14:50, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of district heating systems

[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)

This is an example of What Wikipedia is not with no actual encyclopedic value. It is not a "List of district heating systems" but one of systems ranked on annual heat sales (2001) based on Library of Congress data. I prodded this but it was contested and a "Needs updating" tag placed. It became outdated in 2002 and is just a historical snapshot of some company sales figures. The lead actually states "(2001 data based on this article, other figures based on companies' data):" so is basically primary sourced sales figures. A 2004 link requires a signing up for a Zoho account to save to a clipboard to view which is advertising or promotional. Otr500 (talk) 14:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Otr500 (talk) 14:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:01, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG by virtue of the lack of independent reliable sources. Yes, the article could be updated, but that doesn't fix the inherent issues with the article. This is nothing more than an article that ranks sales figures across some (and only some) companies and so is a flagrant WP:NOTDIRECTORY offender. - Aoidh (talk) 03:38, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not available.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:19, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is a lack of full cover and independent resources, according to WP:INDEPENDENT--Bigneeerman (talk) 13:47, 15 July 2022 (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.