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 delete, given strong arguments for deletion and the way in which this article was created. --Coredesat 08:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of hotels in Hong Kong[edit]

List of hotels in Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

The similar List of hotels in Singapore recently failed AfD after I had nominated it. My rationale there was Spam magnet. 90% redlinks and most of these articles, if created, would be deleted as non-notable or spam. Also, Wikipedia is not the Lonely Planet. Wikipedia is not a directory and such listings without context are useless. See hotels in London for an article that has some value. I believe that the same holds true of this article except for the redlinks part of it which is probably due mainly to the article being 24 hours old. Moreover, the creation of the list itself is somewhat disruptive: it was created by Kappa who strongly opposed the deletion of the Singaporean list. Pascal.Tesson 01:52, 5 August 2007 (UTC) Pascal.Tesson 01:52, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, accomplishes nothing a category wouldn't. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 01:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, accomplishes plenty the category doesn't. Kappa 02:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. —Kappa 02:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages. Useight 02:51, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  So why does it have categories? Kappa 02:52, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to be philosophical, I'm just stating a piece of Wikipedia policy. Useight 17:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the existence of categories contradict your interpretation of that policy? Or should things like Category:Hotels in Hong Kong be deleted too? Kappa 04:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletions. -- KTC 03:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, WP:NOT a directory, or a yellow pages. Not surprisingly Category:Lists of hotels by country (which was added to this article) doesn't exist. The same editor has also created List of hotels in Malaysia. Crazysuit 04:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Which part of WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory are we talking about? Kappa 04:41, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - The list does not offer the minute level of details that are given as examples in both WP:NOT#DIRECTORY and WP:NOT#TRAVEL (phone numbers, addresses, pricing, etc). It's also not an indiscriminate list, as it offers information for which area of Hong Kong the hotels are located - something that categories cannot do. However, it is pretty close to the criteria in WP:NOT#TRAVEL, and it seems like the article was created as a reaction to an ongoing dispute regarding hotel-related articles, so my keep vote is only weak. I would like to ask the editors involved though, as a courtesy, to please list future Hong Kong-related AfDs at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hong Kong. WikiProject Hong Kong members watch that page, and may be of help in determining whether or not a hotel is notable. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Its creation was partly an experiment to see if a list without red links would fare better than a list which included them. Kappa 07:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• It's starting to look like WP:NOT is being spammed here, but please note that WP is not a battle ground. WP:NOT#BATTLEGROUND is very specific in this: "do not create or modify articles just to prove a point". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:37, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• How about if I can improve the encyclopedia and find something out at the same time? Kappa 07:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, per TenPoundHammer. Cheers, Ian Rose 14:38, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm getting sick of these lies actually. Kappa 16:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep your shirt on, mate, and leave your insults out of it. Cheers, Ian Rose 23:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you are actually trying to follow this discussion, why aren't you bothering to participate? Kappa 00:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While I'm not advocating keeping this article (or deleting it), I do feel I must point out that Kappa is correct; the article does add benefit over and above a category by being sorted by area. Subcategories could be used, but they then would not be all on one page. SamBC 16:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. Iianq 16:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete. As per Wikipedia is not the Lonely Planet. To User:Kappa A category accomplishes pretty much the same thing. If you want to arrange them by Location, probably sub cats would help. It has the added benefit of having taxonomy to which newly created articles can be added. Shabda 18:37, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  So the category tree would look something like 3 categories (0 articles); some more empty subcats; and finally 7 sub(sub)categories, 4 of which would contain 1 article and 1 of which would have 2. That sounds really really helpful. Kappa 23:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - This list can easily be expanded to include date of establishment as well as ownership information, etc etc. If it gets expanded, would editors who voted for deletion be willing to change their votes to keep? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOT#DIR - This is a yellow pages level list Corpx 04:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Does the yellow pages tell you when things were established? And closed? Kappa 04:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Does that mean that we can create yellow page type entries, as long as we add the date on which the business opened? Corpx 05:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Yay a response, not an exactly but that's something. Anyway as we know the answer to "does yellow pages tell you when things were established?" is no. Let's try "does the yellow pages tell you that its entries are notable things"? Kappa 05:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Not sure if WP:NOT#DIR applies here, because for a list of hotels to fall under WP:NOT#DIR, I would imagine the article would list addresses, phone numbers, pricing, etc. There's potential for this list to be expanded to include non-directory-like information. For example, Chinese names, establishment dates, ownership (many of the hotels are owned by international hotel corporations). I would like to know if editors voting for deletion would change their minds though, if the article was expanded with such information (preferably using a table format). Because if the article is going to be deleted anyway, I don't want to waste my time working on it. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:58, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  I advise you to wait till Pascal.Tesson forgets, then recreate it. Name the page Hotels in Hong Kong, have an intro at the beginning, make it sortable by date and location and include blurbs. Kappa 06:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• To be honest, I'm really not that interested in this subject matter, especially not enough to create an article like Hotels in Hong Kong. This existing list I'm willing to expand and make look nicer if I know it's going to survive this AfD. And no, if the article gets deleted, I won't be the one re-creating it only to have it get listed for AfD again. It's stuff like that that makes your editing on WP basically a big waste of time. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NOT#DIR; agree with Ten Pound Hammer, would be best served by a cat. – Dreadstar † 09:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why are all these "category" votes in the conditional mode? "would"? THERE ALREADY IS A CAT. It just sucks compared to this list. Kappa 23:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Dreadstar. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 18:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Kappa - or anybody else for that matter - if you are interested in cleaning up this article and possible saving it from deletion, I recommend you copy and paste what I've started in my scratchpad. Use it to re-write and expand the list. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 00:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep per Hong Qi Gong. Mathmo ^Talk 21:39, 7 August 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.