Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of computing articles

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Index of computing articles

[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)

It is unclear what (if any) purpose indices like this have ("Wikipedia indexes are a type of general topics list of encyclopedic content available on Wikipedia (the other type being Wikipedia outlines)." at Category:Wikipedia indexes is the "best" explanation I could find), but any use they do have will only work if they are kept (reasonably) up to date. However, it appears that in most cases when a new article is created it is not added to the index; the recent edits to the index are mostly wikignoming (e.g. when an existing article has been renamed or deleted). Presumably, some automated process was used to generate the list in the first place (e.g. from articles tagged by the relevant wikiproject), but there doesn't appear to be any process to add new articles to it (unlike with categories which afaics make indexes like this redundant). Thus the costs of this page (e.g. misleading readers that we don't have an article about a newish subject, editor time updating links) outweigh any benefits that it might provide. DexDor^(talk) 19:38, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also be happy with replacing the page with a redirect to Outline of computing and updating/removing inlinks where necessary (e.g. where there's currently a link to both the index and the outline). DexDor^(talk) 11:57, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Content/updating issues are not a valid reason for deletion. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:45, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No valid reason to delete, and also this is a valid list/index article that aids in navigation. You can't destroy something because you prefer categories. Dream Focus 02:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That a page is doing more harm than good might not be a valid reason to delete an article (most AFDs hinge on the notability of the article's topic), but the page isn't an article (facts about the real world with references); it's (intended to be afaics) for navigation. A reader could reasonably assume that an index in wp is automatically updated, but the reality is that the page gets more out of date every year as new articles (e.g. Windows 10, Raspberry Pi, WannaCry and thousands of less prominent topics) are not added to the index. DexDor^(talk) 17:57, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not sure how such a list can be useful as it seems like it's not much different than what would be found on a category page. That said it seems like a more general discussion on indices might be better. There is WP:Indexes which was added to Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates with this diff[1]. The discussion Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal - Unified index, glossary, and category using article short descriptions might also be of interest. PaleAqua (talk) 02:07, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Switching back to comment. While I am leaning delete this really needs a more central discussion, as StarryGrandma notes there are a lot of similar pages. PaleAqua (talk) 16:58, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also an index of computer articles seems like it is too broad a subject. The collection of articles included seem rather arbitrary. Nothing about Single Static Assignment (SSA) but Backus-Naur form (BNF) is included, or GNU Bison but not Bison, Yacc but not Flex. QuarkXPress is mentioned but Quicken is not. Unix, 386BSD, 4.2BSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD are mentioned but BSD is not and System V is listed under U as Unix System V. Commodore 1581 but not Commodore 128 or plain Commodore. I could easily go on, the gaps are huge. Filling the missing information would make article too big to work with. PaleAqua (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/redirect There is already Outline of computing; it is absurd to have an article with the same sort of links, just in alphabetical order with no context or organization – that's what categories are for. Of course lists and templates can be complementary to categories, but such redundancy and uselessness is a perfectly valid reason to delete. Reywas92^Talk 02:36, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have a precedent that outlines and indexes can't coexist? This seems to occur more often than not. Daß Wölf 03:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are hundreds of these index articles covering the whole range of Wikipedia articles in the category tree under Category:Wikipedia indexes. This one is just as valid as any other in Category:Indexes of engineering topics. A single AfD is not the way to discuss whether or not index articles should exist. If you find these to be a problem, start an RFC at Category talk:Wikipedia indexes and list it at Template:Centralized discussion. StarryGrandma (talk) 13:29, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OSE. This discussion may well help inform a future RFC (or an XfD for a larger group of indexes), but I don't see any reason why the possibility of doing an RFC means that individual pages can't be discussed. I note that no-one in this discussion has identified any way in which the existence of the page helps readers/editors (apart from a vague "aids in navigation"). DexDor^(talk) 21:50, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At the guideline Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, the section Overlapping categories, lists and navigation templates are not considered duplicative states: It is neither improper nor uncommon to simultaneously have a category, a list, and a navigation template which all cover the same topic. These systems of organizing information are considered to be complementary, not inappropriately duplicative. Furthermore, arguing that a category duplicates a list (or vice versa) at a deletion discussion is not a valid reason for deletion and should be avoided. Redirects of list articles to categories are highly discouraged: list articles should take the place of the redirect. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To my reading that talks about lists not indices. List articles provide details and comparisons instead of just a alphabetical index of article names. See for example List of compilers or List of computer magazines. PaleAqua (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per StarryGrandma. - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:20, 10 August 2019 (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.