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 - despite earlier warnings that I shouldn't explain my evaluation of the consensus, here it seems pretty clear. One unexplained comment to delete, and although it's suggested categories are better than lists, the general feeling seems to be that lists are useful in their own right. Redirection is mentioned, and can always be discussed as an editorial decision, but doesn't seem to have much support. Cheers, WilyD 18:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Singapore companies[edit]

List of Singapore companies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This article is nothing but a duplication of material supposedly listed in the article SGX, so it is a duplicate of part of an existing article. This article also violates NOT a list of links (because that's really all it is) and also NOT a list of indiscriminate information, as there is no criteria set forth for inclusion or noninclusion of a company on the list. MSJapan 00:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Do you have any plans to nominate all articles in Category:Lists of companies by country for deletion? I would think the reasons you list are equally applicable in many of those articles. Meanwhile, kindly check if this article is a complete dublication of Singapore Exchange.--Huaiwei 00:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply: Actually, due to some disambig shuffling, it's actually a less-comprehensive copy of Companies listed on the Singapore Exchange in a different format (although the article claims the list resides at SGX). Moreover, the deletion is because both the category and the other article exist, both covering the same information. Lastly, I didn't know this list type was an overall phenomenon, so I just might go ahead and nominate them all. I'll need to look into it. MSJapan 05:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I did this first, and then the others (per above), and I thought I had left this one off the other list. MSJapan 20:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You did too - sorry, my mistake. I've just checked. Cheers, Paxse 15:39, 9 July 2007 (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.