Talk:List of marketing opt-out registries

Archives (Index)

2012

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Requested move 29 June 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Clear consensus to move this article, but no agreement on where to move it to - every editor proposed something different. Per WP:NOGOODOPTIONS, I'm moving it to List of marketing opt-out registries, as a majority supported making this a list, and marketing opt-out registries appears to be the closest form to the majority of proposals.

Any editor may propose moving this to a new title at any time. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 07:13, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

---

Robinson list → Opt-out registry – The article should be moved from Robinson list to Opt-out registry.

The current title appears to be region-specific and potentially unclear to readers who are not familiar with the term "Robinson list". The article itself defines the topic more generally as an opt-out list or register for people who do not wish to receive marketing communications by email, post, telephone, or fax. The examples in the article also show that many jurisdictions use other terms, such as "National Do Not Call List", "Do Not Call Register", "Do Not Call Registry", "Telephone Preference Service", and "Public Registry of Oppositions".

Under WP:TITLE, article titles should generally be recognisable, natural, precise, concise, and consistent. I do not think "Robinson list" is the most recognisable or natural title for the broader international concept. It appears to be one regional or historical name for a wider class of opt-out registers. "Opt-out registry" would be a more descriptive and internationally understandable title.

The proposed title may also better satisfy WP:PRECISE, because it describes the general subject of the article rather than one particular name used in some jurisdictions. It may also better reflect WP:COMMONNAME in a broad sense, as the article covers several national systems that are not commonly called Robinson lists. Even if individual schemes have specific names, the general concept is more clearly described as an opt-out registry.

This move would also help with WP:CONSISTENT and WP:WORLDVIEW, because the article discusses systems in multiple countries. A title based on one regional term risks giving undue prominence to that terminology, whereas "Opt-out registry" is more neutral and descriptive across jurisdictions.

This request is also relevant to the AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Do not call list, where editors are considering the relationship between Do not call list and Robinson list. If overlapping content is merged, the target article should ideally have a title that is clear, internationally understandable, and broad enough to cover telephone, postal, email, and fax marketing opt-out systems.

For these reasons, I think Opt-out registry would be a better title than Robinson list. Kirbylegal (talk) 14:14, 29 June 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 05:57, 6 July 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Squawk7700 (talk) 00:09, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: Are there other things that people can register to opt out of besides mailed advertisements and phone calls? Does California's website privacy opt-out list fit here? How about Google's AI training opt-out? Netflix autoplay opt-out? User-customized advertisement op-outs for subscription services, televisions, Amazon Alexa, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and websites? Do we really need separate articles for this and Do not call list? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:44, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

  Adding "marketing" to the title might address this concern, but I don't know whether any of these systems are intended to prevent other types of spam, such as survey calls and political mailers. Jruderman (talk) 00:39, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

  Well, we have an article for Opt-out which seems to define it purely as a way to prevent unsolicited advertisement. But it also contains other examples, such as "Wi-Fi positioning system" and "Arbitration". It's confusing. Paditor (talk) 08:08, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

• Seems like an improvement, although I worry about recognizability. "Robinson list" is too region-specific. "Do-not-call list" is both too specific (phone only) and too vague (the US has long instructed call recipients to say the exact phrase "put me on your do-not-call list" to trigger legal requirements, separate from a national registry). Using "registry" instead of "list" addresses the last issue. Jruderman (talk) 00:37, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

  Move to Marketing opt-out registry. This is a descriptive title that incorporates one of the reasonably common terms ("opt-out registry"); adding "marketing" helps recognizability and distinguishes from other opt-out registries (e.g. for AI training datasets). Also, merge in Opt-out#Telemarketing and Opt-out#Postal_service (making this article no longer just a list) and leave a short summary in its place (so Opt-out better serves its purpose as a broad-concept article). Jruderman (talk) 03:41, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

• Comment almost anything would be better than "Robinson list" which is meaningless to much of the world. I would suggest that Robinson list should be reserved for a future "proper" article about the list/register in the US, while the current article, which is essentially a navigational list with a handful of referenced extras, be moved to something more general. There is probably no perfect title, so it might be best just to plump for one, and add redirects for the others. Elemimele (talk) 16:16, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

  Is "Robinson list" an American term? The references I've seen simply describe it as being used in "other countries", and I've never heard it before today. I believe that "preference service" is the advertising industry term for these things. pburka (talk) 22:33, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

  Americans don't use that term. The term seems to be used by Belgium and Spain. While advertisers might call it a mere "preference" expression, that seems like a euphemism, since ignoring these lists can result in penalties. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:40, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

  "Preference list service" might be euphemistic, but it's the closest existing WP:COMMONNAME I've been able to find. It's used officially by the UK's Mailing and Telephone Preference Services and in the United States, such as the Data & Marketing Association's Email Preference Service. pburka (talk) 23:30, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

  I don't like "Preference list" as a title. It's doubly euphemistic: very few people "prefer" to receive spam, and the lists impose obligations on spammers. And it could mean any number of things (including a ranked voting ballot). A web search for "preference list" shows many different uses, not including this one. Jruderman (talk) 01:29, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

  Apologies. It's "service", not "list". pburka (talk) 02:10, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

• No consideration to make this article list-class and move to something that starts with "List of ..."? In solidarity, Aaron Liu (talk) 21:47, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

  Move to List of marketing opt-out registries per below and ZXCVBNM. In solidarity, Aaron Liu (talk) 18:09, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

• Move to Do not call which was merged into this article. This is the worldwide common name in English, as evidenced by the discussion above, and by the names in the Do not call listDo not call list article which is itself currently itself a list rather than an article. Andrewa (talk) 06:53, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

  I would be in opposition to a move to do not call as the current list covers more then just calls. Kirbylegal (talk) 11:08, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

  Can you give an example of what it covers that is more than just calls? Remembering that in English, call can have many meanings... a cold call for example can be done in person, not just by telephone or email. Andrewa (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

  Mail and email are not calls in this sense of the word. Calls are made by telephone. In-person contact is not usually referred to as a "call" in the modern era AFAIK, although I suppose showing up at someone's house was historically referred to as "calling on" them. Not so much "calling" them, but "calling on" them. I don't think that someone showing up at your house would ordinarily be referred to as a "call". Perhaps "cold call" is sometimes used to refer to in-person visits, but as the article on that subject says, I think that "Generally, it is an over-the-phone process, making it a form of telemarketing". I don't think there are any opt-out registries for preventing salespersons from knocking on your door. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:29, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

  Cold calls and calling-on would not be thought related to "do not call". In solidarity, Aaron Liu (talk) 01:02, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

  So for example: the UK's Mailing Preference Service (The MPS list) is included in the list and would be more aptly described as a Mailing Opt Out service/Preference service, another is the canadian Addressed advertising reduction service and the Finish combined Mailing and telephone preference services.

  Both unsolicited email and mail is considered cold mailing rather than cold calling. However I am no etermologyist. Kirbylegal (talk) 06:39, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

• Move to List of do not call registries or List of do not call lists. This is a list, not a prose article, it should not be named as such. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:37, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

  As there not all call based registries, it confuses things if such a title would be used. Maybe something like List of marketing prefrence services or something along those lines Kirbylegal (talk) 16:44, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: I think possibly all of the suggestions above are better than the current title Robinson listRobinson list, which before this discussion was completely meaningless to me and which would I suggest be equally meaningless to many other readers. The reference provides a rationale for the name, but does not identify the source of this rationale, which frankly sounds like folk or false etymology to me but I may be wrong. The source given for this claim is a marketing reference, not a linguistic one, so a better source would be good if one can be found, and if not then that is good evidence that what we have is folk etymology and in any case the claim would be inadequately sourced and could be removed leaving a very dubious case for the current article name. Andrewa (talk) 05:20, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Do not call list was merged into this article after consensus at AFD, editors from an RM at talk:Do not call list were invited to this discussion and the closer of the AFD found consensus on some kind of move therefore leaving this open for some more discussion. Best, Squawk7700 (talk) 00:09, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

• Move to Marketing preference service or List of marketing preference services. "Preference service" is the only generic term I'v seen used in reliable sources. Most of the other suggestions above appear to be invented here. pburka (talk) 00:18, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

  Support those alt suggestions (first suggested by Kirbylegal). Including the word "marketing" helps. It could also be something like Marketing opt-out registry. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:24, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

  Marketing opt-out registry as suggested by Barrelproof is certainly better than the current title Robinson list, particularly if supported by sources. We have no good sources at all for the current title, only a single occurrence in a marketing document. So as a descriptive title Marketing opt-out registry has at least some basis in policy, while the current title has none. Andrewa (talk) 05:51, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

  I agree that seems BarrelProof's suggestion is probably the most descriptive title and would be easy to understand what the article covers. Just a slight comment because its a list of Opt Out Registries would it be better to use the plural of the word registry Kirbylegal (talk) 08:58, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

  That slight comment seems to suggest that we should use the plural form Marketing opt-out registries, or am I missing something? Because wouldn't that violate wp:plural? Andrewa (talk) 00:15, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

• Move to Marketing opt-out service I suppose. Should also be considered for further merging with Opt-out after the RM concludes. –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 11:06, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

  That should have said "to Marketing opt-out service or Marketing opt-out registry " –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 05:53, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

  Has anyone explained why they prefer "service" over "registry"? In my mind, these are not really services. They are typically prohibitions, imposed with penalties for violation. I don't see a service being provided by someone not sending me an advertisement or by someone not calling me on the phone. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 08:43, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

  To a shift worker, such as I once was, who didn't want to pay extra for the priviledge of not having my name in the 'phone book, me again, such a service would have been greatly appreciated.

  Unfortunately the attempts at such services have, in Australia at least, been unimaginative to say the least. Come the revolution, we will set up pay-by-the-second numbers which are not easily distinguished from domestic telephone services, and plant these numbers into commercially available telephone directories. People who seek to make money by cold-calling these numbers will then find themselves instead in debt. People who misuse these directories for profit will simply find themselves out of business. Neat and effective. Andrewa (talk) 03:25, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.