Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Directory of Environmental Organizations and Resource Persons in Tamil Nadu

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. Consensus is that the scope and content of this list violates WP:NOTDIR.  Sandstein  08:24, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Directory of Environmental Organizations and Resource Persons in Tamil Nadu

Directory of Environmental Organizations and Resource Persons in Tamil Nadu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Wikipedia is not a directory of contact information. This appears to just be a list of contact information people for different organizations, and cannot be re-written into an encyclopedic list article. Singularity42 (talk) 18:22, 27 November 2009 (UTC) Reasons clarified after comment below. Singularity42 (talk) 19:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• Keep. This does not contain contact information and is not a list or repository of loosely associated topics. These organizations and individuals are all closely associated with environmental conservation and environmental education in Tamil Nadu. Wikipedia:NOTDIRECTORY#DIRECTORY says there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous (notable) because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic. Wikipedia also includes reference tables and tabular information for quick reference.Marcus334 (talk) 19:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• Keep per Marcus. --CarTick 19:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC) changed opinion. see below.
• Delete "This list will facilitate communications between the environmental community and the general public." That's very nice, but Wikipedia is not a free web host. This does not appear to be a serious attempt an encyclopedic article, and it doesn't even need to be re-posted here because it already exists on the internet: [1]. Furthermore, WP:NOTDIRECTORY specifically mentions that Wikipedia is not a resource for conducting business, which is the clear and obvious intent of this article. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Rebuttal:

• There is no original content "hosted" here and linked comment "not a free web host" applies to user pages.
• This list is more encyclopedic (adjective: comprehensive, full, complete, vast, universal, wide-ranging, thorough, in-depth, exhaustive, all-inclusive, all-embracing, all-encompassing and thoroughgoing) than the primary reference.

• This list contains about 1/3 more organizations than the primary reference.
• None of the other 48 linked references in the list are included in the primary reference.

• The list is amenable to rapid updating, while the primary reference is fixed in 2008.
• There is no mention or intent of "conducting business".
• If "it doesn't even need to be re-posted here because it already exists on the internet", that argument could equally be applied to any Wikipedia article and then there is no need for Wikipedia.Marcus334 (talk) 23:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

rapid updating - Not relevant; WP:WEBHOST is about user pages - Right, however WP:NOTMIRROR; This list is more encyclopedic [...] than the primary reference - then we run into possible original research problems... --Cybercobra (talk) 03:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

• comment not appropriate for Wikipedia, but this should be taken straight over to Appropedia or similar, which would welcome the content. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 01:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• comment: Agreed that it's probably not appropriate here, and it's definitely welcome at Appropedia. I've imported it to Appropedia:Directory of Environmental Organizations and Resource Persons in Tamil Nadu, after edited the usernames in the XML file (to list the Wikipedia userpage address). Please note that any such page with some kind of value in environmental, design or development issues is welcome to be transwikied to Appropedia. (An Appropedia admin would be needed to do the import thing, but if it's mainly the work of one person, they can just be credited in the edit summary, or add it themselves.
• I don't want to preempt a deletion - that should be considered separately on its own merits. --Chriswaterguy talk 04:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete WP:NOTMIRROR - We don't reproduce primary sources without good reason. I also have very serious doubts as to the notability of the topic; this appears to be a "Non-encyclopedic cross-categorization". --Cybercobra (talk) 06:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - There's nothing encyclopedic about this. It's virtually directory information. Shadowjams (talk) 12:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Comment I have made several substantive changes and additions to eliminate negative perceptions of this as just a directory copied from another source. Naming this a directory was inaccurate. It is more accurately a short article including a series of comprehensive up-datable lists. I suggest that the article be moved to a new space titled '''Environmental Organizations and Resource Persons in Tamil Nadu'''. See:List of countries by ecological footprint, List of songs about the environment and other Lists of environmental topics, for other environment related lists to compare their notability, appropriateness, encyclopediaocity and Non-encyclopedic cross-categorization.Marcus334 (talk) 20:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

• The changes you have made and propose to make are purely cosmetic and do not fix the underlying problems. Pointing out that other similar lists exist is generally not considered a valid argument. I think this would be more appropriate as a category. Any organizations that are sufficiently notable on their own would have their own articles, and the category could be used to organize them. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
• The examples you cite are at least general in scope, whereas the article in question is rather specific (IMO too specific), in this case on a geographic basis. --Cybercobra (talk) 03:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

• Comment it can be merged with Environment of India and the current title could save as a redirect. --CarTick 01:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
• Keep per Marcus' comments. This is a very comprehensive list of organizations in a notable field, per List of environmental organizations and List of conservation organisations. Because this list is so comprehensive and lengthy, it shouldn't be merged into those articles. Also see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List of environmental organizations for some more keep rationales. I think the sentence "These lists are intended to increase public knowledge of the professional environmental community in Tamil Nadu...." should be removed because it gives the wrong impression that this list is being used solely for advocacy. Instead, it's a very encyclopedic list. And the title should be changed to "List of..." Priyanath ^talk 05:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, the general concept of environmental organizations is notable, and many instances of them are notable (hence a general list of the instances is permissible), but I doubt the oddly specific underlying topic of this list, namely "environmental organizations and resource persons in Tamil Nadu" is notable. --Cybercobra (talk) 05:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. Environmental and conservation organizations are indeed notable, but this is a directory of contacts, not an encyclopedic list of organizations active in Tamil Nadu. As the nominator states, Wikipedia is not a directory of contact information. For me, the fact that the individual sub-lists are hidden by default emphasizes the fact that this page is designed to serve as a database, not an encyclopedia entry. --Orlady (talk) 15:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Per . Warrah (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
• Moved to Lists of Environmental Organizations and Resource Persons in Tamil Nadu to avoid people getting obsessed with word Directory. Lists is more accurate. Marcus334 (talk) 19:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

From WP:AFD: "While there is no prohibition against moving an article while an AfD discussion is in progress, editors considering doing so should realize such a move can confuse the discussion greatly, can preempt a closing decision, and can make the discussion difficult to track." In any event, whether or not moving the article during an AfD is problematic, manually changing the discussion code at the top IS a problem. I have reverted those changes back. Singularity42 (talk) 19:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I only changed name from Directory to List as everyone is referring to it as a list and wanting to delete because WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Content is unchanged. Marcus334 (talk) 19:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Especially worrying is "Independant consultants" section. Materialscientist (talk) 12:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

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.