Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of wholesale prices

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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 04:40, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Index of wholesale prices

Empty as it stands; If expanded, would be an indiscriminate collection of information, see WP:NOT QEDquid 11:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Information is not present anyway and will constantly change, a good example of what should not be a Wikipedia article haz (user talk) 11:16, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, not encyclopedia material. What's next, List of current share prices? (Please don't start that.) - Randwicked Alex B 11:22, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, wikipedia users interested in the cost of ocean shipping should be able to find out how it has varied over years and decades. Kappa 11:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Fine then, start an article about historical development of key item / service prices. WITH DATA.--QEDquid 11:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

• Originator: This article can be changed to address the fact the info changes. The article can also be made to change with changing facts. Nonetheless, there is one fact: there is no easy way for average people to know the real price of things. Wikipedia, as well as being informative in an archane way, must be informative in a subversive way. Advocates for deletion should not be against the article for reason of quality: the initial submission is only an idea. To delete, you must accept that Wikipedia stands for the "Middle man": he does not want discussion of wholesale prices and real costs, except in expensive journals. Thanks. Anthony717 11:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Originator: I can accept deletion by votes, but I don't accept deletion is a good idea. Wikipedia is not a static book of facts; it is a dynamic set of currently accepted truths. One truth, in my opinion, is that retail prices for many things are too high because wholesale prices are kept somewhat secret. Yet there are no well kept secrets. There are only secrets kept from most people, not including eager Wikipedians. We can, together track the prices, month by month, of thousands of goods and services. Thanks, Tony. Anthony717 11:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand. --Terence Ong 11:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Originator: I know it is a big ask, but just imagine what is possible. Now price lists for commodities (other than the few you read in the newspapers) are very expensive, even though the prices are not really secret and absolutely not proprietary (see "sweat of the brow" in leg. lit.). Anthony717 12:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: It's wikipedia's task to aid understanding, not provide data. This page can do both, but it should be written to assume that the information is not being continually updated. Kappa 12:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Originator: If the article is destroyed, no harm is done. But think of the good that could be done. Prices are very important. Whistleblowers could be given an outlet. Reluctant informants could concede. What is the harm in such a forum? Can't such forum be enclyclopedic?Anthony717
• Originator: If this article is deleted, it cannot be deleted by the idea that it is not important. It must be deleted by the idea that that general public has no right to know wholesale prices, in defense of the merchant class.Anthony717 12:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Appears largely arbitrary Orange Roughy and short black pepper - what are the criteria? Utterly unmaintainable. Dlyons493 Talk 15:20, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, I can't see how this article can be useful, because there are no standard wholesale prices for the items listed. Is the article supposed to list prices for every single vendor out there? JIP | Talk 15:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as per Dlyons493 and JIP. Lukas 15:52, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Anthony please stop adding comments to this page, you've said plenty. The Land
• Delete How comprehensive, authoritative or up-to-date could a list like this be? Unmaintainable in essence.  (aeropagitica)  22:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - There's no way in hell something like this could be kept up-to-date ... and prices vary a lot by season and location anyway. Totally impossible to do. Cyde Weys _vote^talk 23:51, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Difficult to maintain, arbitrary criteria for inclusion. (ESkog)^(Talk) 00:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete WP:NOT: "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" -Will 01:02, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Random (and empty) list, with no set standards, benchmarks, or sources; of volatile, constantly changing data, for no real purpose. Other than that, just peachy. --Calton | Talk 04:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, unmaintainable. Even if Anthony did keep it up to date, it would only be nominated for deletion again when he lost interest or was hit by a bus/elephant. --Malthusian (talk) 11:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as unmaintainable and a bad case of listcruft. Stifle 23:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, Pavel Vozenilek 21:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom Incognito 05:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Originator: I accept defeat. I am sorry if I defended this article with exaggerated claims. Maybe there is a better way of doing this, or maybe it will be done elsewhere. Anthony717 08:37, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete There isn't any information except for one of the listed items, as per above: delete. --Lightdarkness 17:04, 19 January 2006 (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.