Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of instant messaging clients

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 Redirect to Comparison of instant messaging clients. Yank sox 18:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List_of_instant_messaging_clients

Delete a list is not an ojective decsion because the list serves as a stub like the example of the software split. It should be expanded with a concise comparison based upon usage statistics, and its role in modern business.The multiprotocol list is useful for research. The point that 2bit software/freeware is added wrecklessly can be addressed by a requirement that the new entry must have 2-5 verifiable outside links (ie: sorceforge), and that their entry is placed inot talk before it is added. I thinks this is a better solution than deletion.

This page serves no purpose other than to allow non-notable two-bit apps to appear alongside notable ones. It's a pointless list and you don't learn anything. Andymarczak 06:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a list is not right for this type of subject, a comparison would be better and that is completely different.--Musaabdulrashid 07:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Comparison of instant messaging clients. Dinosaur puppy 07:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above. Leuko 08:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Comparison of instant messaging clients to List of instant messaging clients as comparison is an inherently pov word. MLA 12:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The comparison in this case is purely spec-led. No opinions involved. Having seen this though, my opinion is now Delete Both, as I don't believe the Comparison page is any different to the Yellow Pages. Andymarczak 12:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment There is nothing inherently POV about comparison. You can easily compare by sets of criteria that are not POV-laden. Comparing seems like a reasonable name for the article, because that's what it does (lists what features each client does or doesn't have). Also, I Strongly Disagree with the idea that this falls under Yellow Pages. Such a list is very useful and informative to users that are in search of instant messaging clients and/or services. [Comparison of instant messaging clients] is not simply a directory, but a well laid-out and deserving article. Ardent ^†_∈ 15:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Redirect' There is no reason to delete this as such a list can be useful, but with the existence of Comparison of instant messaging clients the content in the disputed article is already covered. Ardent ^†_∈ 13:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Comparison of instant messaging clients. the wub "?!" 16:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above - comparison provides substancially more information in a more useful format LinaMishima 23:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge then redirect.Ronabop 03:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and replace Read this and look at the German Wikipedia to see how they organised it.NaturalBornKiller 10:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I mean the articles Liste von Jabber-Clients and Multi-Protokoll-Client.
Redirect per Ardent. I think splitting up the Comparison Article per NaturalBornKiller's suggestion would be a good idea, but in the mean time a simple redirect would be good.

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.