Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of stackable switches

Comparison of stackable switches

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

I am nominating this article for deletion after lengthily discussion here: User talk:Dsimic § Re: List of M.2 SSDs as a section in the M.2 article. Many other articles were mentioned in the discussion, but let's start with this one and see what the consensus is. The main arguments raised in the said discussion are:

Articles with lists of products, like this one, tend to be biased toward certain manufacturers, as they do not contain all products. This list, for example, does not contain even half of known stackable switches, which turns it into an advertisement. Listing some manufacturers and products, but not others is not neutral, and lists like this can never be neutral, so it should be deleted.
List is outdated, and it is almost impossible to make it up-to date, which makes it per se incorrect. Article that is per se incorrect should be deleted.

Please, do not make arguments in the discussion like "There are other similar articles". The goal is to delete all such articles, and this one is just a start. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:22, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per the above provided nomination proposal, as well as per the above linked discussion. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 13:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete we are not Consumer Reports or any of its IT equivalents, and that's the only reasonable location for such a chart. Mangoe (talk) 14:45, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep—I don't see a policy-based argument for deletion here. We are allowed (and encouraged) to delete non-notable articles, attack pages, hoaxes, etc., but there is no policy I'm aware of that encourages the deletion of articles that are out-of-date or incomplete. We fix those, not delete them. See WP:DELETE. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 22:10, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, actually, the arguments raised above are totally policy-based. They are based on the WP:DELETE policy. Reason for deletion No. 14: Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia. Certain editors think that this article is not suitable for encyclopedia because it is promotional (WP:PROMOTION, another policy), and because it is impossible to maintain its accuracy. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:57, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]