Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Verizon FiOS

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 speedy close. Article can be fixed. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 13:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Verizon FiOS

Verizon FiOS (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

CSD G11 - advertisement of services for Verizon FiOS; external links to Verizon website for pricing →Lwalt ♦ talk 03:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete Appears to be used for promotional purposes only. --Hdt83 Chat 03:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and speedy close Well referenced, I have read this article as my primary source on Fios over the past year. I can't imagine anyone wanting to delete it unless they wanted to promote an alternate service. Any formatting or naming issues should be discussed on the talk page. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 03:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
No...I don't work in communications of any kind (cable, telephone, etc.), so there's nothing to promote. The article reads like an advertisement, not to mention links to Verizon pricing information were included in the article. Some editors have already expressed the concern about the article reading like a Verizon advertisement on the talk page for the article. Therefore, pricing and availability of FiOS services can be found outside of Wikipedia, instead of from the promotional advertisement that passes for an encyclopedia article.
  • An alternate solution to this article would be to strip out the advertisement sections and merge the remaining information about FiOS with either Fiber to the premises or Fiber-optic communication. →Lwalt ♦ talk 04:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Again, this has nothing to do with deleting the article. We don't merge Ipod into Mp3 player, if the article has too many technical specifications. This should be discussed at the article, not at deletion. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 04:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Absent a major rewrite as the article stands today, the article fails under Criteria G11 (advertisement) as encyclopedic, and therefore stands as a candidate for deletion. →Lwalt ♦ talk 04:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and rewrite if necessary. Very notable service, if the article is too ad-like it should be edited, not deleted. CitiCat 04:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Obviously an extremely notable and important product. Present version seems like description, not advertising. DGG 04:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I fail to see how this can even be in the slightest bit mis-construed as advertising. It is a valid sourcing. I see thousands of examples of such on Wikipedia daily. Keep it. Evilgohan2 05:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and clean up. A notable telephone company can have its own cable system.--Edtropolis 13:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep, strip out the "Service offering" section (as it is currently) and summarize the information contained, and it will be fine. --soum talk 16:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep May need some work, but this is a very useful article. Gblaz 17:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep The article provides extensive details of this clearly notable service. If this is an advertisement, it is the worst one I have ever read. Alansohn 17:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. I'm tired of marketing spam that keeps sneaking in through this article, clearly we don't have enough resources to compete with the verizon lobby :-(. Even that I personally removed the blatant advert tag after a decent cleanup of the lead section was done, I feel that this article doesn't increase WP usefulness overall. --BACbKA 19:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. It is a very notable service and the page should be rewritten instead of removed. It doesn't read like an advertisement to me. SeanMooney 04:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. This article is very useful despite parts needing revision. It serves a need as a concise overview of a notable service and obscure acronym. It's a perfect use of WP. oybobby 16:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This is clearly a notable and verifiable service. If it reads like an advert in its current state, then tag it for clean up (or work on it yourself). ccwaters 17:53, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep If the information is straight-forward, factual and non-"salesy" keep it if Wiki's purpose is to provide information -- past and present. Information is good, if it's reliable and really does inform, not sell. -- MikeD918 --66.242.37.180 20:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I looked up for FiOS pretty much the same way I do for any information, and not having this page here will be really disappointing, as well as not in line with the purpose for which Wikipedia exists. It gave me a simple and quick explanation, which works well for an ordinary user like me.
  • Keep Just wanted to know what FiOS stood for (and if I was capitalizing it correctly). Agree with all the other "keepers". Rewrite if necessary, but don't delete!
  • Keep This is absurd. Why delete an artical because its messy? I think a cleanup template would have been better suited for this artical. Verizon FiOS is the first major Fiber Optic Communication provider. At any rate, strong keep and clean up. NTFS 21:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This article must be kept as it is on the only provider of FiOS in the world. I also say that the nominator should be aware that deletion is not the only option.--Lucy-marie 22:52, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The article needs clean up, but the subject deserves attention for being the first major fiber service. --QTCaptain 03:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Comment: Deletion closure (by self) undone, forgot totally that I had voted in it. Somehow missed it when reviewing the comments. --soum talk 05:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per ccwaters Xlation 19:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep, clearly notable. If you want to improve the article, go ahead. Tempshill 21:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I agree this could be a better article, but anyone who wants it deleted probably has ulterior motives (high phone bill, Comcast employee, etc.) Dj stone 11:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep needs work to bring up to proper, encyclopedic standards. But the topic is still notable and no reason to delete. --Aude (talk) 12:57, 22 June 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.