Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bookstores

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 keep. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of bookstores

Including redirect pages List of booksellers and List of bookshops.

This can't be necessary, can it? It seems a bit abstruse as a disambig. Prod tag removed without explanation by page creator. ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 13:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Rules99 (talk) 14:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As the page's creator, would you care to list a reason? ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 14:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. Rules99 (talk) 14:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind that, per Wikipedia's AFD guidelines, votes without rationales may be discarded by the closing admin. Firestorm (talk) 15:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is pure listcruft and not encyclopaedic at all. Firestorm (talk) 15:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind that, per Wikipedia's AFD guidelines, votes without rationales may be discarded by the closing admin. Rules99 (talk) 13:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rules99, I think you are right in wanting to keep the list of lists, but this comment (and copy-n-paste of Firestorm's response to you) is silly. You did not give a reason above, prompting Firestorm's helpful reminder. Firestorm did give a reason (even if it may not be correct). -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I encourage everyone to look at the article. I don't think that words like "listcruft" apply to something that isn't actually a list. However, this is not a list of bookstores, but rather (an unneccesary) disambiguation page that says "List of bookstores may refer to: list of bookstore chains (or) list of independent bookstores". This may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but will not be missed if deleted. Mandsford (talk) 16:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, not technically a list, but it seems like it was originally meant to be. I would say it should be redirected to Bookstore. Firestorm (talk) 17:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And then how would users find these lists? Rules99 (talk) 22:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that's easy. They would type in the searchbox "List of bookst--" and "list of bookstore chains" and "list of bookstores" will pop up. Or they would type in the words "list bookstore" in the search engine and get this [1], which is more useful. Either way, it's better than clicking on an article entitled "List of bookstores" and it turns out that it's not a list of bookstores. Mandsford (talk) 22:55, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Um bookselling is not a list of bookstores either, and I think it would be a little bit harder to find them from there than from this page. Rules99 (talk) 23:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The auto-complete doesn't work on all browsers, wouldn't work at all for someone typing "List of bookstores" (I know I type faster than the auto-complete works), and depending on it to serve navigational purposes is a bad idea. Ending up at a search results page is no better and in some ways worse than ending up at a list of lists that the reader might have been looking for. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Compare to List of animals. The disambiguation project and/or the lists project may need to come up with an approach for these instances. Navigational assistance seems to be needed for users looking for a list of bookstores or a list of animals. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to Lists of bookstores, per Lists of lists (already in place for the lists project). -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I fail to see how this page serves any useful purpose when all it does is link to two other lists. Cazort (talk) 19:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify: all list articles do is link to other articles. All Category:Lists of lists articles do is link to other lists articles. Being a list of list articles isn't a reason to delete. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to Lists of bookstores per JHunterJ. It's a reasonable list of lists. —C.Fred (talk) 22:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and retool as a dab page. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 21:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How can it be retooled as a dab page? It's a list of lists, not a disambiguation page. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, plausible search term. I don't see how it matters whether it's a (short) list of lists or a disambig page--it's a useful and necessary navigation aid regardless. Wkdewey (talk) 04:31, 19 February 2009 (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.