Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of street view services

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. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:15, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of street view services[edit]

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

A lot of WP:OR as well as fitting in with multiple criteria WP:NOTDIR #5 sole catalogue; as well as #7 simple listings. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 03:00, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:NOTDIR, just a list of businesses with few secondary sources claiming their WP:ORG notability and far too much link-rot. Ajf773 (talk) 10:00, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:20, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:20, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07 (T) 00:28, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. First, I think WP:NOTDIR has been misinterpreted for the purposes of this debate. WP:NOTDIR #5 says "An article should not include product pricing or availability information unless there is an independent source and a justified reason for the mention." Neither product pricing nor availability are mentioned in List of street view services. The article does indicate that some of the maps are free and some are not, but that is different from listing specific prices. WP:NOTDIR #7 does not apply either, since many of the entries in this list do give additional context. Now to address the notability argument. I suggest there is a case for keeping this article under WP:LISTN. How Google StreetView is killing the competition does discuss street view services as a group, namely how Google has maintained its dominance in this group. There's also this list from Lifehacker, so there is sufficient coverage of alternative street view services as a group. Funny enough, Google Web Search has been impeding my efforts to save this article—I've been asked to solve three captchas while searching for sources. Altamel (talk) 04:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:NOTDIR#3 is most applicable in this case. The bulk of the article is list of websites of services, many of which have no notability (and cannot be inhereted) from the article or referenced by primary sources. The links are not articles but external links and WP:EL#ADV applies as well. If there is anything notable in this article, it is a very very small portion of it Ajf773 (talk) 10:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - I disagree. WP:NOTDIR#3 says "Contact information such as phone numbers, fax numbers and e-mail addresses is not encyclopedic." None of that information is present in the article. WP:LISTN specifically explains "the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable" if the list topic itself is notable, and I argued above that the topic does meet WP:LISTN. Altamel (talk) 15:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - WP:NOTDIR is not limited to phone numbers, fax numbers and email addresses. External links promoting a website are no different Ajf773 (talk) 20:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please KEEP. This page is the ONLY website I can locate on the Internet that provides alternatives to Googles Streetview service. I use the links for non commercial private hobby related purposes. It needs to stay PLEASE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank954x (talk • contribs) — Frank954x (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- WP:NOTGUIDE Ajf773 (talk) 07:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as complement to Category:Street view services per WP:CLN and index of articles per WP:LISTPURP and (yes, even) WP:NOTDIR. Every complaint lodged above is a fixable problem, and issues such as whether this should be limited to only entries that have articles or what information it should have about each entry are matters for normal editing and discussion to decide. postdlf (talk) 23:46, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:48, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist — Music1201 ^talk 01:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 01:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The list needs massive cleanup. I just took a first pass to tone down the WP:LINKFARM. But this meets WP:NLIST and can be done well. Even if it has to be chopped down to list those articles in the category, it's a valid navigational list. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:14, 24 July 2016 (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.