Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomson Local
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 03:12, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It's a brand of phone book. Radiant! 14:31, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
- keep; yeah, but they produce a different one for each local area in the UK. We have Yellow Pages. Dunc|☺ 15:21, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It was practically the only competition in this field that British Telecom had for a long time. Keep. Uncle G 19:01, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)
- Keep. Very notable. They also have a horrendous tv advert doing the rounds at the moment. —Xezbeth 19:20, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep it. Wyss 20:06, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It's a brand of phonebook worthy of note, which is why we will be keeping this article. GRider\talk 20:28, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)~
- Keep - household name in the UK, though I never quite understood why people used it over the official BT one. TSP 09:43, 2005 Feb 15
(according to history Uncle G 14:24, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC))(um, what? No, definitely me, though UncleG may have slightly edited it (like, added an extra space or something) when he added his signed reply. TSP 08:45, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC))- the official BT one — I see that the monopoly telephone company mindset is still not yet dead, a quarter of a century on, and even though Yellow Pages has itself been one of BT's competitors for a couple of years now. One of the things that The Thomson Corporation should mention is that it was Thomson that introduced Yellow Pages to the United Kingdom, back in 1966, when it was an advertising sales agent for the GPO's telephone directory. "official BT one" — chuckle. Uncle G 14:24, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)
- Maybe TSP just doesn't like the Thomson version and prefers the BT edition? Keep, anyway. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 21:05, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I'd actually now usually use The Phone Book, BT's semi-competitor to the Yellow Pages (it has what are effectively Yellow Pages sections) - I think there was only a year in which there was no BT-owned option. At work I now have The Phone Book, Thomson Local, Yellow Pages and Business Pages (which is published by Yell) on my shelf, and I can't think of an earthly reason to have so many... but that doesn't make any of them non-notable. TSP 08:45, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- the official BT one — I see that the monopoly telephone company mindset is still not yet dead, a quarter of a century on, and even though Yellow Pages has itself been one of BT's competitors for a couple of years now. One of the things that The Thomson Corporation should mention is that it was Thomson that introduced Yellow Pages to the United Kingdom, back in 1966, when it was an advertising sales agent for the GPO's telephone directory. "official BT one" — chuckle. Uncle G 14:24, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)
- Keep. James F. (talk) 02:28, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.