Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Market share of leading PC vendors: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
a re |
add |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
*'''Weak delete''' - per [[WP:NOT#STATS]]. The statistics may not be ''too'' sprawling but the layout is terrible, making it hard to follow, and there is insufficient text to explain everything. Of course, cleanup is not delete but I'm not convinced a cleanup is warranted over a delete in this case. Also, it is based on essentially a single source.--[[Special:Contributions/137.122.49.102|137.122.49.102]] ([[User talk:137.122.49.102|talk]]) 20:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC) |
*'''Weak delete''' - per [[WP:NOT#STATS]]. The statistics may not be ''too'' sprawling but the layout is terrible, making it hard to follow, and there is insufficient text to explain everything. Of course, cleanup is not delete but I'm not convinced a cleanup is warranted over a delete in this case. Also, it is based on essentially a single source.--[[Special:Contributions/137.122.49.102|137.122.49.102]] ([[User talk:137.122.49.102|talk]]) 20:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
*'''Summarize and merge''' to [[Personal computer#Market and sales]] and to articles about individual vendors. The information is quite pertinent to the aforementioned articles, but should not be presented in a separate article, per [[WP:NOT#STATS]]. --<span style="background:#CC1010;color:#FFA0A0">''' Blanchardb''' </span>-<small><sup><span style="color:#A62428">[[User:Blanchardb|Me]]•[[User Talk:Blanchardb|MyEars]]•[[Special:Contributions/Blanchardb|MyMouth]]</span></sup></small>- timed 00:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC) |
*'''Summarize and merge''' to [[Personal computer#Market and sales]] and to articles about individual vendors. The information is quite pertinent to the aforementioned articles, but should not be presented in a separate article, per [[WP:NOT#STATS]]. --<span style="background:#CC1010;color:#FFA0A0">''' Blanchardb''' </span>-<small><sup><span style="color:#A62428">[[User:Blanchardb|Me]]•[[User Talk:Blanchardb|MyEars]]•[[Special:Contributions/Blanchardb|MyMouth]]</span></sup></small>- timed 00:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
** That's not a good idea. That section is already a sprawling mess of poorly connected information. [[User:Pohta ce-am pohtit|Pcap]] [[User_talk:Pohta ce-am pohtit|<small>ping</small>]] 19:55, 25 May 2010 (UTC) |
** That's not a good idea. That section is already a sprawling mess of poorly connected information. Cramming more info in it would be a bad idea. Perhaps a merger to [[History_of_personal_computers#Market]] could be discussed. I don't see anything that needs deletion from ''this'' article though. [[User:Pohta ce-am pohtit|Pcap]] [[User_talk:Pohta ce-am pohtit|<small>ping</small>]] 19:55, 25 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' WP:NOT#STATS says not to use unformatted raw data, this is formatted and easy to understand. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 02:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' WP:NOT#STATS says not to use unformatted raw data, this is formatted and easy to understand. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 02:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' as RAN says, not a violation of NOT STATISTICS, this is very selective summary information, not indiscriminate. What Gartner sells is the analysis--the summary is is not copyvio. '''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 05:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' as RAN says, not a violation of NOT STATISTICS, this is very selective summary information, not indiscriminate. What Gartner sells is the analysis--the summary is is not copyvio. '''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 05:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 20:00, 25 May 2010
- Market share of leading PC vendors (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested prod. The prodder tried to bring this here, but was unfamiliar with the procedure. The prod rationale was Wikipedia is not an excessive listing of statistics (See Discussion) For my part, Neutral until I look into the issues. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 15:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help. I'll repeat my initial proposal from the article's discussion: There are other "market share" articles on Wikipedia (such as operating systems and web browsers), but those articles go into much more explanatory depth in the importance of the topic and the tabular data simply is used to reinforce that. Right now, I'm inclined to propose deletion of this article under Wikipedia is not an excessive listing of statistics. There is very little text putting this information into perspective, and frankly I'm not sure if this is a legitimate encyclopedia topic or just an attempt to give away for free what Gartner sells. There is a possibility that this is an infringement of Gartner's compilation copyright. Even though some of the information comes from media sources, most of it is from Gartner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlanK (talk • contribs) 15:57, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. These statistics are by no means excessive. There's only one percentage per company per year. The commentary between the tables could use some inline refs. I'm sure the sources used in the article can be diversified that way. Pcap ping 18:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Weak delete - per WP:NOT#STATS. The statistics may not be too sprawling but the layout is terrible, making it hard to follow, and there is insufficient text to explain everything. Of course, cleanup is not delete but I'm not convinced a cleanup is warranted over a delete in this case. Also, it is based on essentially a single source.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 20:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- Summarize and merge to Personal computer#Market and sales and to articles about individual vendors. The information is quite pertinent to the aforementioned articles, but should not be presented in a separate article, per WP:NOT#STATS. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 00:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- That's not a good idea. That section is already a sprawling mess of poorly connected information. Cramming more info in it would be a bad idea. Perhaps a merger to History_of_personal_computers#Market could be discussed. I don't see anything that needs deletion from this article though. Pcap ping 19:55, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep WP:NOT#STATS says not to use unformatted raw data, this is formatted and easy to understand. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as RAN says, not a violation of NOT STATISTICS, this is very selective summary information, not indiscriminate. What Gartner sells is the analysis--the summary is is not copyvio. DGG ( talk ) 05:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- 'Keep and clean-up I had trouble finding this information (it's a useful outside of just pure stats) and it only covers the top 60% of the market (specific, non-comprehensive list) and it is not at all a sprawling, unorganized list. Really, the section on market share in Personal computer#Market and sales is to dense and it gets off topic from the core PC listing. The personal computer/market and sales section should be trimmed with the extra historical information shuttled here, making these stats in compliance with the "contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader" Indolering (talk) 05:37, 25 May 2010 (UTC)