Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of single-board computers

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 redirect to Comparison of single-board computers. Tawker (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of single-board computers

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No clear inclusion criteria and a scope of potentially thousands of unimportant and hugely non-notable boards with very little in common. The WP editing model is inappropriate for this sort of article, per WP:NOTDIR. As a result, this is just a spam magnet, hugely skewed by listing those with the most active EL adders, not those with significance. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but restrict to boards with their own Wikipedia pages to remove the less significant examples. A surprising number of the entries do have Wikipedia pages, which suggests this could be valid for navigation. A merge with Comparison of single-board computers (at either name) is possible, but a lot of people seem to dislike comparison articles even more than overlong list articles. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm against that simple statement for inclusion, per WP:IMPERFECT. The fact an article exists is rather random, depending too much on whether someone has bothered to write it as yet. I'd be happier if such a condition was stated as "meeting WP:N" instead. There's still the risk of the list bulking out with linked articles on boards that meet WP:N, yet are trivial and show no overall importance in either the current landscape of products, nor historically.

There's also the important principle that list articles are valued for listing items that don't meet WP:N. Many boards on this list should be listed as families (where their family is significant), rather than just listing the model year and RAM size variants.

If this article is to exist (and I'm happy for it to exist, if we can fix its problems) then it needs some sort of editorial narrative. Why are boards presented here as significant? "Significance" here would have an editorial meaning above WP:N, meaning that they tell us something about the overall picture of single board computers, either now or historically.

Also, what's a computer? I'm in favour of losing the Arduino and similar, to an article on single board microcontrollers. There is significant difference between things that are controllers and things that run general purpose UIs.

As it is, the most crucial to lose are the un-notable parts catalogue entries, such as a list of half-a-dozen near identical ARM boards from the same maker. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:46, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete cause we also have Comparison of single-board computers which contains nearly all relevant boards. And in my opinion a board is not really relevant if nobody has the time to write it in the comparison. Also I could just add every wireless router to the List of single-board computers cause they use just one board. --Txt.file (talk) 11:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:23, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:23, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Comparison of single-board computers: this title is occupied since 2 February 2012‎ and recieves over 13k monthly views, so it deserves redirect per WP:R#HARMFUL. While Standalone lists are perfectly legal on Wikipedia, the scope of this list is well-defined, and inclusion criteria problem may be addressed by editing, this list is redundant to aforementioned comparison and provides little to no encyclopedic value. Also note, comparisons are also considered standalone lists, which means that we have two lists on the same topic. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 17:29, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Comparison of single-board computers per czarkoff and txt.file. Binksternet (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It complements "Comparison of single-board computers." While there is an overlap, both present lists in an informative manner. Ideally a "database" would have one entry for each datum with various windows into the db. This being a user-written text, we can tolerate some overlap. Jason from nyc (talk) 14:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to comparison. Scope and incl per above. Widefox; talk 23:11, 6 July 2014 (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.