Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"iPod versus"

"iPod versus" was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete

"iPod versus"

This is not an encyclopedia article, nor does it have the makings of one. Rather, it looks like a debate forum. In fact, the originator of the article, User:Pomegranate states, "Started this article cos I'm bored of the year-old debate on a iRiver fansite. I also hope that it will be useful to people looking to buy an iPod." Please, these are not good reasons! Wikipedia is not Consumer Reports or a fansite. --C S 03:01, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

• Comment. Make sure to also read the talk page for additional perspective, just in case you're one of those people who doesn't always diligently do so for every nominated article. *guiltily raises hand* JRM 03:04, 2004 Dec 6 (UTC)
• Merge with iPod and delete. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality/^talk]] 05:27, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Merge and delete is not an acceptable option under the GFDL (unless you do something about preserving the history) but there's nothing to merge anyway. Andrewa 10:10, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Can only be NPOV if listing the technical specification of the machine. No point. --Gtabary 13:14, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a consumer review site. — Asbestos | Talk 14:04, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete ... as the talk page shows, wikipedia is working well here: an inappropriate page was started by a relative newcomer, who has discussed its merits and agreed that a different page would be better, and who hopefully will now become a regular wikipedian. All hail collaborative editing (sans rants) - DavidWBrooks 15:09, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete Just looking at the title, this page is ripe for deletion. Dumb title, absolutely not encyclopedic material. Maybe at best, material from this to bemigrated to just iPod. --SpaceMonkey 16:42, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  Moved this vote from Talk:"iPod versus". JRM 19:02, 2004 Dec 6 (UTC)

• Delete: DCEdwards1966 21:09, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete wiki's not a review site or blog Wyss 00:11, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• I'm not convinced that this article is worthless. There is a controversy/debate over the iPod and its generic rivals, information which seems fine to collect here (just as we have for creationism vs. evolution). This title is not the best, of course. VeryVerily 19:08, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. I second Asbestos' sentiments. Wiki is not a consumer review site. --MPerel 00:08, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, the iPod never was lete in the first place. Pedant 00:14, 2004 Dec 11 (UTC)
• Keep. Useful information, no bias. Surely the point of an encyclopeadia? Dan100; 10:45, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete this has no place on the Wikipedia. A personal website maybe. --Computerjoe 16:29, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. This is an Encyclopedia, not an opinion place. [[User:Hydnjo| Hydnjo\^talk]] 01:49, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.