Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of VMware 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 merge to VMware. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of VMware software

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

Hi.

I think this article should be deleted but it is a fork of VMware; both of them extensively list VMware Inc. products and one of them is enough. Please remember that Wikipedia is not a directory; extensive listing of items (such as products) without an educational or critical commentary (covered by reliable sources) or an associated Wikipedia article is not allowed.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC) Codename Lisa (talk) 07:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep We agree that this is a fork or spinoff from the main article VMware. Per WP:CFORK, "if the content fork was unjustified, the more recent article should be merged back into the main article.". Merger is not performed by deletion. Warden (talk) 08:38, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Question: Hi. So, do I understand that you are in favor of a merger? If that is so, then I am curious, shouldn't you write Merge instead of Keep? Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - The issue here is whether the article should be deleted or not. I do not favour deletion because it would disrupt merger or any other ordinary editing actions. If you want to discuss the merits of merger, please start a merge discussion per the merge process. Warden (talk) 10:50, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Hi. If I opened a separate discussion, that would count towards gaming the system and I don't want to do that. And since merger opportunities as alternatives to deletion are frequently discussed at AFDs, I don't think anyone would mind if you said anything you have to say here. Besides, I proposed the article for deletion because I see nothing merge-worhty. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 11:50, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Colonel Warden, please see WP:CLOSEAFD for the information about the scope of AfD discussions. If AfD is running, merge is supposed to be discussed in the AfD discussion if such outcome is viable. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 16:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:38, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:38, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

category The notion of "keeping a list" is reasonable and it would be WP:UNDUE to include this within the main article. However this list is of articles that already exist and there is negligible discussion of each within that list article. We can handle such a situation better through a category. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NOTDUP which explains that "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." Warden (talk) 13:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not arguing that this category would duplicate a list, I'm arguing that the list is duplicating a category. It only includes extant articles, it makes no additional description of those articles other than listing links to them. That is the core subset that a category does, and does automatically. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Andy. I see the discussion is relisted. Now, in the spirit of establishing a consensus, I reviewed Category:VMware; maybe you should take a look at it and see whether you'd consider changing your suggestion to Redirect. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, still delete. There's no need for a cross-namespace redirect to map the list article to a category. The category is quite sufficient in itself. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I mean redirect to VMware not redirect to Category:VMware (Czakoff said below). Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 05:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then definitely delete. That wouldn't even be a list. My point is not "Where to store the article text for this list article", but rather "As this list article does nothing beyond what a category provides, then use the category". Andy Dingley (talk) 09:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to VMWare per WP:CFORK: merge would be a good choice in this case, but there is no content on this list that is not already present in the proposed target. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 16:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 17:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with VMware. Clearly duplicative, though notable. Steven Walling • talk 01:06, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with VMware. The article VMware isn't so long that it needs to be split, although this is valid content and shouldn't be deleted. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:48, 27 August 2012 (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.