Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Google Directory

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. Whether to merge and if so, where , can be discussed on the article talk page. Randykitty (talk) 09:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Google Directory

[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)

non notable Qwv (talk) 23:42, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Software, and Websites. Qwv (talk) 23:42, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since it is a non-notable defunct service unlikely to receive any more coverage in the future. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:37, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – fails WP:GNG and WP:SUSTAINED; any relevant material can be merged into List of Google products. InfiniteNexus (talk) 11:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Just because a service no longer exists doesn't mean the page about it should be deleted. It shows up quite a lot in Google Scholar (which, by the way, speaks a lot about its notability), and I wish that when encountering something in old scholarly papers, one could quickly figure out on the Wiki what it was. Suitskvarts (talk) 15:14, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist to see if there is support for a Merge
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also favor a erge, but it seems to me that the best target would be to merge into DMOZ#Content users as a single paragraph. Most of the content in this article is actually describing DMOZ's structure anyway. (Also, LOL @ this sentence in the article: Everything was green. Ah, the memories.) -- Visviva (talk) 06:01, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or merge. I see some sigcov in (Calegari, S., & Pasi, G. (2010). Ontology-based information behaviour to improve web search. Future Internet 2(4),) but it's a bit jargon-filled. There are a decent number of other smaller mentions in academic resources, including instructions on how to use it to find field-specific information. I think WP:NOTTEMPORARY probably applies here as web directories are mostly forgotten now, but were quite the thing for a while. A such, we should should certainly seek an ATD. Visviva's suggested merge would be a fine one, unless we find more sources that distinguish Google Directory from other web directories. —siro χ o 12:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Keep. Google has already closed down several services including Google Video, Google_Catalogs Search and Google Notebook. Similarly, Microsoft closed down Windows 98 and several old operating systems, see the List_of_Microsoft_Windows_versions and the List of Google products. Each one of these has its won article in Wikipedia. Merging is not a good option because the content is large and worth to be covered WP:PRODUCTS. The content of this topic can be improved, I added several reliable citations mostly academic books, I suggest editors should be giving more time to improve it and the article is still under editing. Mazin suliman (talk) 13:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to List of Google products. Discontinued products can be notable enough for a standalone article but this one doesn't have enough significant coverage in reliable sources to merit a full article. It can easily just be a paragraph in the list. Steven Walling • talk 06:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because I'm not seeing a rough consensus among editors and two different target pages for a Merge have been mentioned.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I think a complex merge with some appropriate verifiable information going to each of the existing section DMOZ#Content users and the existing entry in List of Google products would be appropriate here. I'm willing to handle it if it's the consensus. —siro χ o 22:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Siroxo – there certainly seems to be some significant coverage, and lack of potential future coverage isn't relevant by itself. If the article is merged it should be into DMOZ with a link from List of Google products, any additional information would disrupt the format of the list article, and Google Directory is definitely notable as a major user of DMOZ. --AlexandraAVX (talk) 12:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think the sources are sufficient. The "Missing manual" book at 6 pages on the directory, and Google power tools has 8. Both give pretty detailed descriptions of the service. "Learn google" seems to have less but I can't view the relevant pages. I've added names to the references to make them easier to reuse, and will try filling in some of the areas without sources. Lamona (talk) 23:33, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have made a lot of improvements to the article, so if you !voted early please take another look. Lamona (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep is preferable to merge in this case, due to the principle that "notability is not temporary". Eluchil404 (talk) 06:56, 2 August 2023 (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.