Talk:Amazon Kindle content sources

Prod

I've disputed the prod on the basis that this is a fork due to WP:SIZE. The material was located on the Amazon Kindle page, but was just too large. Yngvarr (t) (c) 15:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I would argue that it really shouldn't be anywhere. Wikipedia isn't a directory of services or sites that offer downloads. Also, the direct links to the websites makes me uneasy, as it seems to toe the line of advertising. TNXMan 15:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I haven't looked at every link listed here, but many of them are free redistribution of Gutenberg content. Why not just list Gutenberg? Well, Gutenberg only offers basic text formats, and these offer Kindle format. Actually, if you look at the talk page, you'd see that I was originally against having this, but for whatever reason, I've changed my mind. I'd like to say that I won't argue with you if you take it to AFD, but of course, I will :) Yngvarr (t) (c) 15:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Cameron's comment below. I think I will nominate this at AfD and look forward to arguing with you there. En guarde! :) TNXMan 16:24, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I first introduced this content back in December 2008. People were looking for and discussing available content for the Kindle. Since then numerous people have added and enhanced this table. There is demand for the information. I stated back then, that I had no problem moving it to another page. Someone a month ago deleted the info. So I put it back, but rather than start a war, I simple moved it to a separate page. I understand the argument about not being a directory, but so far, it is being maintained by people who think this info is useful. Further, I have no affliation with any of these sites or Amazon. I am a Kindle owner. Many of the sites listed are free content.Knipfty (talk) 16:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I found this table to be very useful, and even made a minor edit (which didn't make it to this version). I came to the Kindle entry today specifically for the table, and was concerned that it was gone. I even went through the history and copied the table so I had it at least. I think the original deletion by Cameron (with the comment: "We aren't a shopping guide - pointless anyway, unless we plan to listen every website in existance?") was appropriately addressed by instead making a link off the main page. There are thousands of good WP pages that have similar lists of links. WP:DIRECTORY does not seem to apply based on the examples given. Clevell (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

notability?

This seems a clear break of WP:NOT - we aren't a directory of services. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

But it is relevant to what the Kindle is (and any eReader for that matter). People feel a criticism is that you are locked into Amazon, which are not. Further, it bring together information about the usefulness of the device beyond what Amazon would advertise.

Lastly, what is AFD? Knipfty (talk) 18:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Afd is Articles for deletion. Articles are nominated for deletion and users are given seven days to debate whether or not an article should be kept or not. You can find this article's deletion discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Amazon Kindle Content Sources. TNXMan 18:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Capitalisation

Should this page not be Amazon Kindle content sources ("content sources" lower case)? I can't see "Content Sources" as being a trade name, so lower case seems significantly more logical to me. Thanks! Greg Tyler ^{(t • c)} 18:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC)