Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of 12-13.3 inch subnotebooks

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 delete. postdlf (talk) 21:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of 12-13.3 inch subnotebooks

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

Comparison of individual products/models. Wikipedia is not a catalog. This is an article that is perpetually out of date (somewhat relevant is WP:RECENT). An encyclopedia shouldn't duplicate a consumer electronics retailer's product comparison tool. Also, WP:INDISCRIMINATE as it makes no justification for the 12"-13.3" size range (subnotebook does not declare such a class). Finally, if the point of the list is not to list current models but all 12" - 13.3" subnotebook models, then the problem is much more clearly WP:INDISCRIMINATE. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:28, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree that (part of) the list may already be a little out of date. However, many devices can still be attained from 2nd hand websites. The reason the article was made is not so much to list the commercial devices, but to allow people to compare these devices and pick the best (cheapest) option for them so that they can attain useful information trough it (ie via wikipedia). It wasn't made to compare the commercial devices an sich. KVDP (talk) 08:04, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - to allow people to compare these devices and pick the best (cheapest) option for them so that they can attain useful information trough it (ie via wikipedia) -- specifically violates WP:NOT. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a buying guide or tool for price shopping. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:25, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Inherently non-notable topic. A list of presently available 13.3 inch subnotebooks will continually be out of date. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:13, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 01:11, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete inherently out of scope, impossible to maintain and keep current (in fact it looks like it's already out of date). No way this could reasonably be maintained and it's of no encyclopedic value even if it were. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:24, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NOT#INFO Secret ^account 11:55, 20 May 2014 (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.