Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Utah companies

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. Icewedge (talk) 02:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Utah companies

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

This article is an alphabetical list of companies within the state of Utah. Wikipedia is not a directory. Contested PROD. I42 (talk) 07:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Swift Delete I agree with I42, this is not dmoz.org ShawnIsHere (talk) 08:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Part of a series of similar lists. This list also goes hand in hand with Category:Companies based in Utah (see WP:CLN). Once kept, it should be renamed to List of companies based in Utah. Lugnuts (talk) 09:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Per WP:WAX and WP:ALLORNOTHING, the sole fact that there are other similar articles is not a valid keep rationale. I42 (talk) 18:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - The information is still a valid subject for a list with clear inclussion criteria. Lugnuts (talk) 18:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think there is a clear conflict between WP:LIST and WP:NOTDIR, as most lists can be interpreted as directories. I have raised this (at the end of a related discussion) at Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not. I42 (talk) 20:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Nothing wrong with this list's existence esp. when it links to only bluelinks. WP:CLT does state that each method should "not be considered in conflict with each other" so this can exist along side a Cat. well focused and verifiable. Which part of NOTDIR are you specifically referring to in this Nomination? Exit2DOS ^{• Ctrl • Alt • Del} 01:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It is quite clearly a Yellow Pages directory, all the more so since Lugnuts added industry categorisations. I42 (talk) 12:39, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Quite clearly you are mistaken as any Yellow Pages also include listing the contact information of the Business'. This is a List, like a lot of others on WP, plain and simple. Exit2DOS ^{• Ctrl • Alt • Del} 23:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - You apparently aren't reading the same policy as I am as the entry for "Yellow Pages" quite clearly states that for it to be considered that it must include contact information such as phone numbers, email addresses, or fax numbers. In fact, that same entry specifically indicates that "Wikipedia also includes reference tables and tabular information for quick reference", and states that only those lists which are loosely associated are not acceptable. In this case, the list is very clearly defined (but not too-narrowly defined) so that it is not indiscriminate. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - The entry clearly says "yellow pages" and the link which explains what that means says "an alphabetical listing of businesses within a specific geographical area (e.g., Greater Chicago), which are segregated under headings for similar types of businesses (e.g., Plumbers)" - which is exactly what we now have. The entry also states that contact information etc. is unencyclopedic - I believe you are reading something which is not there when you assert that yellow pages must include that. I42 (talk) 21:25, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is pretty much a directory listing. There's some confusion here over what CLT says. It doesn't give a licence to duplicate every category with a list. Categories and lists are two different processes and as such they have different standards associated with them. Naturally these standards don't synch up so that every category should be backed with a list and vice versa. This is a good example where a category is acceptable and a list is not, since this list violates WP:SALAT (the topic is too broad for an encyclopedia article to be written about it) and WP:NOTDIR. Them From Space 06:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Commment Rather than a A-Z list, I've updated the article (to mirror the List of companies based in the Philadelphia area) to have a table showing location, industry and year formed. IE - more than can be gleaned from simply looking at the category. Lugnuts (talk) 11:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per changes made by Lugnuts. This list clearly does not simply duplicate a category, and is more than just an alphabetical list of companies. WP:NOTDIR does not apply here. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'd like to see some clear criteria for what should appear on this list though. For example, some of the companies that have been included that aren't truly based in Utah, though subsidiaries are, or the company was founded in Utah. This includes Kennecott, which is just a division of the British-Australian Rio Tinto Group, Browning Arms Company, which is basically one of Fabrique Nationale de Herstal's brands, and IM Flash Technologies, which is really just a specialized manufacturing facility owned by Micron and Intel. Also, some major companies are missing, such as ICON Health & Fitness, Lifetime Products, W.W. Clyde Company, Mity-Lite, and RC Willey Home Furnishings (which, to be fair, is a Berkshire Hathaway company). GreenGlass^(talk) 05:06, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Kennecott was founded in Utah, though. It was only recently purchased by Rio Tinto ("recently" being in 1989). ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I should also note that Browning Arms Company was founding in Utah in 1927, and IM Flash Technologies is a jointly-help subsidiary of Micron and Intel which was founded in Utah in 2006. So they do belong on the list. I've added the others you mentioned which weren't already on the list. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:50, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Categories and lists go together; we need to watch the lists, of course, but they are two alternate ways of organization. Browsing is a key function of an encyclopedia , and we should keep all systems we can maintain. DGG ( talk ) 05:11, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good topic to make a list about. There should be one for every state. Dew Kane (talk) 05:42, 14 March 2010 (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.

Keep Twenty other states have "List of StateX Companies". All 50 should be done. Whoisjohngalt (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]