Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of PDF software

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The result was Nomination withdrawn as heading to WP:SNOW LibStar (talk) 07:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of PDF software

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

there already exists this template Template:PDF_readers or would be better served by a new category. LibStar (talk) 06:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The template contains a fraction of the info within the list, and the list's presence does not prevent a series of categories being created. I'm not seeing any reason to delete this. Someone another 18:06, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep templates and categories include only a tiny bit of the information of a list. --Bothary (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reasonable list of software. OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 00:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:CLN. Lugnuts (talk) 07:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No more list vs. category wars please. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As useful as this information is, policy consensus is that mere lists of links do not belong in an encyclopedia. WP:NOTLINK There are few facts in the article, and the links do not serve as verifying sources. --UncommonID (talk) 21:54, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— UncommonID (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep. This is not a mere list of links. It is organized, contains information on license and platform, and a description. It is an aid to navihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Formatgation for the articles that make up the list in a way that categories cannot be & is consistent with both our written policy & our history of keeping software comparisons/lists when they've been brought up to AfD. --Karnesky (talk) 16:12, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I came across this article this evening and found it quite useful, so perhaps this is something of an WP:ILIKEIT comment. However, while it certainly isn't a perfect article, it does provide more information than would a category or template in terms of descriptions of what software does and sub-categorisation by operating system. --Kateshortforbob _talk 19:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think of this as information that really belongs in the Portable Document Format article but has been moved into a separate subarticle because of size and weight concerns. I don't know if that's how it was created, but it would make sense. More than just a list of links, and definitely worth keeping. I am not sure what the formal criteria are, but if they allow all the crap that has been featured but not this, they are badly broken. Hans Adler 18:12, 11 October 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.