Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Premium email

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 redirect to Email. Sandstein 07:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Premium email[edit]

[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)

The article offers nothing that would not be in the email article. Premium + product name is not normally sufficient for an encyclopaedia entry. Also, unreferenced. — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 22:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Lightburst (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have begun making improvements to the article's layout and navigation; I have also added references. I find this article notable. If we decide to merge, WP:ATD-M there is no section on the Email article for premium or pay email, so that is a likely target. Lightburst (talk) 23:24, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (there's nothing to merge) to Email, which, if you charge for it, is the subject here. The only source added thus far that's about "premium email" is a "top 5" list hosted by ... a commercial email company. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhododendrites:, thanks for checking. There may be something more soon - please check back. Lightburst (talk) 00:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is a marketing term. It is typically code for paid email, in contrast to free email. Some providers offer a "premium" class of service and lower tiers, though if they call it premium, professional, gold, or whatever is variable. Yahoo offers a "professional premium". Paid email is more objective and accurate IMO for the topic and might be less objectionable on marketing grounds, premium sounds kind of spammy. I would suggest before there is a separate article on paid email have some content about it in the email article. -- GreenC 23:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good suggestion about the name. We could move it now. Lightburst (talk) 00:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GreenC: I completed that move for the sake of accuracy. Lightburst (talk) 00:40, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I just moved it back. Doing this in the middle of an AfD is just going to be confusing with incoming links and closing tools. If it survives, it can be moved after the AfD is closed if anyone thinks it's appropriate to do so. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? links all over the project were made, and closers know what they are doing. Sigh... There is precedence for such moves during AfD. Lightburst (talk) 18:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, moves are done frequently during AfD per WP:HEY, it greatly helps in certain cases to reframe the topic correctly. There is no technical reason to undo the move when it helps editors judge the nature of the article. I have done it more times than I can count and never had complaints about tools or incoming links. -- GreenC 15:30, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who has spent any time at AfD should really know that performing moves mid-discussion, especially without a clear consensus behind it, is controversial. Not necessarily disallowed, but at bare minimum it's subject to BRD like any other bold page move, so there's not much argument about someone moving it back pending discussion. Personally, I don't like it. Determining what the underlying subject is is often part of figuring out whether it's notable, and if a subset of people simply decide what it is then everyone else is forced to adapt/argue/waste time. In this case, it's not so egregious, but there's definitely a difference -- one that I would argue strengthens the case for redirecting. "Premium" is about [some ambiguous set of] special features that you pay for. "Paid" literally just means "you pay for it" and thus includes any and all email that you happen to pay for, like all of the many services in the early days of email that charged you just for having an email address (or for removing a limit of 10 emails in your inbox or whatever). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to email. There is no justification for having a seperate article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There's (currently) no content at Email about paid/premium services, so unless anything here is actually merged in, a redirect would be inappropriate. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Email: Best to briefly talk about it in the target article if possible. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 05:20, 28 August 2020 (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.