Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telecommunications billing

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. Sandstein 08:29, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Telecommunications billing

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

Page consists almost-entirely of a collection of commercial links a13ean (talk) 16:30, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 January 20. Snotbot t • c » 16:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Article has been renamed to List of telecommunications billing companies; a more accurate title per the article's content. Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "WP is not a directory." If there is something special about telemmunications billing that makes it notable beyond any other kind of billing, then write an article on that. Otherwise WP is not for lists of service providers. Borock (talk) 20:52, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - WP:NOTDIR has eight subpoints; which of them is the above !vote referring to? Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Mainly #4 "Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business." Borock (talk) 01:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  And in any case I would note that WP:NOT points out the examples given are not intended to be exhaustive. Stifle (talk) 20:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTDIR. Nageh (talk) 20:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - WP:NOTDIR has eight subpoints; which of them is the above !vote referring to? Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think we had exactly the same discussion just before. And again, WP:NOTDIR#4 fully applies: Wikipedia articles are not directories or directory entries. Most of the entries are red-links or non-existent links, and those which are blue links link to the company and not the product. As such, simply a directory of commercial products without sufficient notability. I agree that the list could be useful to some but we are not a sales platform. Examples like this are exactly why we have WP:NOTDIR. Nageh (talk) 01:29, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This list is congruent with WP:SALAT, (Appropriate topics for lists). It is focused and discriminate based upon companies and computer systems specifically related to telecommunications billing. This is a reasonable content fork from the Telecommunication article. Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:42, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been cleaned-up, more references have been added, many primary, some secondary, at this time. (I'm already aware that primary sources cannot be used to establish topic notability.) Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:36, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Articles Telecommunications billing and List of telecommunications billing companies (more properly, List of telecommunications billing vendors) could be created, but should be based on reliable sources (in case of a list especially inclusion criteria should be based on sources), Bezik (talk) 12:35, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Big list of non-notable companies just serves as a spam magnet. If you removed all the nn companies, and all the companies where the only reference is their own Web site, you're left with virtually nothing. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 18:16, 26 January 2012 (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.