Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fender Musical Instruments Corporation product list

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. No consensus over whether this stand-alone list should be kept, but there is consensus to rename this. (non-admin closure) sst✈^(discuss) 09:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fender Musical Instruments Corporation product list[edit]

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

Product catalog (Wikipedia is not a catalog). Unreferenced entirely. Most links redirect to the corporate page; the rest are broken because the product is not notable. Indiscriminate list problems, as well. The best place for a list of Fender products is Fender's commercial website. Mikeblas (talk) 13:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 13:56, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 13:56, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 13:56, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as I see no better need for this article yet. SwisterTwister talk 06:17, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:32, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge to a Wikipedia:Books article, leaving a redirect. Another option might be to merge with the NAVBOX. This is a useful article and is accessed 1300 times per month. I disagree with the nominator's contention that the manufacturer is motivated in any way to maintain this information, they are interested in selling new instruments and generally do not maintain information on legacy models. This type of information is otherwise only available in very expensive specialty books. This is a fantastic compilation directory of legacy models/articles where a non Wikipedia geek can easily improve the topic. I believe the perceived problem here is the form, not the content. -- 009o9 (talk) 00:15, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 14:34, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it is clearly a sales/product catalog... WP:SOAPBOX is being grossly violated by this. If it survives AfD, categorize it into a list article and contact WikiProject Guitarists to fix it. Ceosad (talk) 18:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, in my opinion the worst issue is that it is entirely unreferenced. Ceosad (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in the article that requires a reference WP:MINREF. Unless someone challenges that one of the products is not by Fender, or challenges the opening sentence. I think if you just change the name to "List of Fender Musical Instruments Corporation products" you will have a list article. I'm not seeing how a glossary of products, by name only can be WP:SOAPBOX. Sadly, a lot of model-specific articles have already been AfD'd and redirected to a parent article. Specific model component information and the place to keep it has been lost, the information was helpful when restoring an instrument to factory specs, or inspecting specific models for authenticity. The number of guitar players in the US was estimated at 10 million in 2004 and Fender is well respected brand, this is not an obscure topic. Sad to see so much nice work destroyed. -- Paid Editor -- User:009o9^Talk 19:11, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename to List of Fender Musical Instruments Products (or something else in line with Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lists#Stand-alone_list_articles). I agree with 009o9's analysis of why references aren't essential for a list of this nature, and the fact that so many of the entries have stand-alone articles here makes this a valuable addition to the encyclopeia as a list. Invoke WP:IAR if needed. I also agree that this is useful and represents a lot of work which should not be thrown away; if it is felt that it's not appropriate for en.wikipedia for policy reasons, it would make sense to move this to some other venue where it could find a good home. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to revisit your observations. There are lots of red-links in this list. Many of the active links from specialty models (celebrity endorsements or sub-models) are piped or redirected links to generic models. I completely agree about another venue for this list. How about the Fender Musical Instruments Corporation corporate website, at fender.com? -- Mikeblas (talk) 12:03, 26 November 2015 (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.