Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of NBC slogans

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 this AfD resembles a WP:POINT listing as it was referred in on AfD then listed here. The consensus here is that its not an "indiscriminate collection of information". Gnangarra 05:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of NBC slogans

List of NBC slogans (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Similar to list of Seven Network slogans, which is also on AfD, this is an indiscriminate collection of information. Resurgent insurgent 08:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• • Keep How is it an indiscriminate list? There is a list of things there not intended to be included (i.e., song lyrics, FAQs, instruction manuals, etc.), but how does this apply there? 207.62.231.2 21:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as clearly indiscriminate information for the sake of information. - Peripitus (Talk) 09:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - It has an article in Dutch. BlackBear 14:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Article on the advertising/name branding of a major company? I can't imagine how it wouldn't qualify in some way as notable. Article could use some context and cleanup, might be merged back into the main article, but I see no need to delete. Here's three [1][2][3] articles which discuss the overall subject, and who knows, a more comprehensive search might reveal more about this stuff. Mister.Manticore 16:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

And according to [4] there is a hall of fame for such slogans. It may be an industry group, but that they are doing it points to some validity of the subject on its own. Mister.Manticore 17:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete I don't care how notable NBC is. It's an indiscriminate list. YechielMan 18:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • How so? This is not a FAQ, tour guide, phone directory or any of the other commonly described indiscriminate lists, but completely valid information that's no different than say, List of state mottos. I could be convinced that this article should be merged, but bold declarations without reasoning are not convincing. Mister.Manticore 19:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I'm also not sure how reliable the single reference is; I have no point of reference for opening or accessing a .ra file. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 19:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment BTW, looking at the page, it seems that several of the slogans have their own articles. Are they going to be proposed for deletion, or is there existence acceptable while a list of them is not? I still want to know how this is indiscriminate by the way. An actual articulation of it would help, since this is hardly the only list of slogans for a major company on Wikipedia. Mister.Manticore 23:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep clearly not a indiscriminate list, clearly discriminates as to what can be on the list, there is only X many slogans and no more until they make a new one. Indiscriminate lists sprawl out forever and can always grow longer forever. Owlofcreamcheese 03:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, indiscriminate, non-encyclopædic list. What's next, "List of NBC programming changes"? There are only X many changes and no more until they make a new one. Lankiveil 11:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC).
  • Well, one could look at a Category:Television_schedules and get that information, and I wouldn't mind a page tracking their programming history more directly. It's not like television programming isn't the subject of news articles. Mister.Manticore 14:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Are the individual pages going to be deleted? Hopefully not. WAVY 10 15:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, agreed with Owlofcreamcheese that it is far from indiscriminate. Contrary to Lankiveil's fear, creating a list of programming changes would be insane. Merge with main article, maybe, but this is an ill-advised nomination... Ranma9617 02:45, 31 March 2007 (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.