Deletion of List of DirecTV channels (2nd nomination)

Comment: per . These are unquestionably covered by the policy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: Fails the spirit as well as the letter of . Directories such as this are very difficult to maintain, as the information can change very fast. DirecTV is a notable subject worthy of encyclopedic analysis. How they order their channels is not
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: Wikipedia is not a directory or electronic channel guide, which these are equivalent to, as shown by their stating that they give current channel assignments. They lack independent sources needed to satisfy , and just provide (likely outdated) copies of what would be better obtained from the cable companies' own websites or the online channel guides. My cable provider moves channels around and adds or removes channels frequently, so I question the usefulness of these soon-to-be-stale copies of the provider's channel lineup
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Although I'm definitely an inclusionist, this series of articles has been a thorn in my side for years. It has no logical means of organization, breaking everything into colors and packages that I haven't been able to ever make sense of and which the average Joe/Jane has to do multiple scrolls up to the legend to understand fully, contains channels and alternate feeds rarely watched by anyone and of no use to anyone outside of sat-enthusiasts, and most of all, all of the channels are already listed in the network articles themselves with their channel locations on these providers or have a 'the network is available on (providers X,Y,Z)' note in the article, making this all duplicative. Besides that, judging from my past experience of having to clean up after, it is also one of the easiest and most annoying of article series to vandalize by IPs and troublemaking users, and fixing the complicated template structure takes multiple saves to work all out. Most of all, notwithstanding the zeal of others to keep everything up to date, they're a small minority of editors and if not for them, this would age badly otherwise because there is a steep learning curve to maintain this long list of templates where you're only going to see editors with long experience (and serial vandalizers) editing it. Definitely , and all channel lists are better listed by the providers themselves on their websites, and Wikias=options to maintain this information in a more collaborative and less volatile venue where the vandals can't get in. Note I did rationale Speedy Keep on nom #1, but that was six years ago and many building issues before where it was just a simple basic list easy to navigate
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: per  and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of AT&T U-verse channels
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: These pages (and others like them) for other countries are the best and sometimes even only source of information on the specific channels on a platform. I do not believe it comes under , because that seems to cover only directories for business purposes such as business directories, promotions or catalogues, etc.. They are well-organised under channel genre (I'm talking specifically now about the UK-based ones which have also been nominated under this page). They are well-sourced in every way - I've seen people want to add sections to these articles which have been removed because (despite how correct they are) there are no sources, so they're obviously also well-policed and looked after. These pages have little to no original research as some people seem to be implying; believe it or not, there are extensive media outlets for the reporting of upcoming launches/closures on the TV side of things; many of the sites that are (or could be if the appropriate tag was added) sourced are ones used by the industry itself. As there are few television platforms of interest in the UK these articles are also notable in that they provide quite an easy way to compare them in addition to everything else that they're useful for. These constitute valuable and useful glorified lists essentially, so in conclusion, definite and strong keep from me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: These lineups somehow violates  because we can't serve readers information about satellite channels that either come and go or are just there... to merely direct readers where the channel is. That is DirecTV's job, not ours. Also, editing and revising the whole table of channels is very complicated, pointless, unnecessary, and time-consuming. Prose is enough; table is excessive
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:DIRECTORY)

Comment: per  ("electronic program guide"). Secondary reasons include how practically impossible it is to keep this type of list up-to-date, given the arbitrary and unannounced manner that TV providers change and reorder their lineups
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: List of DirecTV channels (United States) in numerical order might be a better title. In any event, the topic fails . Fails . It may be an information source that has value to some people, but it's not a valuable information source per PURP. There's no Navigation or Development purpose to the list. And the big one, delete per , which notes "article on a radio station should not list ... current schedules". List of AT&T U-verse channels is close enough to that to fall under NOTDIR
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:LIST||WP:LISTPURP||WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: As I mentioned at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of AT&T U-verse channels, this is regurgitation of material that falls short of our  policy and that can be much better presented elsewhere (i.e. by the companies themselves) and in a more reliable and timely fashion than we can here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)