Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E-Mail Letter

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

E-Mail Letter

Redundant. Maniamin (talk) 23:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

redundant because … ? pablo_hablo. 23:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Article is about methods of sending paper letters by composing them as e-mail and having them printed and delivered through the mail. Could possibly use a clearer title, but for the moment I am at a loss to think of one. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I do not understand the nomination; could the nominator please expand? pablo_hablo. 15:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~ Keep: not a good article, but I need some clarification of what's wrong, other than the obvious (lack of good references). The concept gets over a quarter of a million Ghits, and some news Ghits: [1], [2], and [3]. Bearian (talk) 18:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC) Can be rescued easily. Bearian (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Those aren't good references, as they seem to be using "email letter" to mean simply "email message". Wkdewey (talk) 02:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The reference section has two major news papers that talk about this. The external links section does seem a bit spammish though, it listing commercial sites that provide this service. Dream Focus 10:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Combine with Hybrid mail, which is much the same thing. (Maybe that's what the nominator meant by "redundant", we can only guess). pablo_hablo. 10:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why not combine hybrid here instead? If most who use this call it E-Mail Letter, then that should be the name of the article with the information for it. I only hear the word hybrid when someone talks about hybrid cars these days. Dream Focus 09:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete in agreement with the nom, and with aplogies to various contributors. The information is already quite extensively covered at Email, which itself is a quite definitive and well sourced article on the subject. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've read through that section of the Email article, and it doesn't have nearly as much as information as this article could provide. The information about the US government's first attempt to use it in the seventies, is something that should be copied over to this article, it being a relevant fact. Dream Focus 09:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This article is not about email messages in general, as delete voters seem to think, but specifically about an interface in which one writes and sends an email, which is then printed by an intermediary and delivery. It needs better sourcing if it is to be kept, however. Wkdewey (talk)
keepJust need sources and some editing.User:Yousaf465 (talk)
Keep but tag. -- samj _in ^out 16:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and clean-up. Plenty of sourcing and notability as pointed out above, I'll see if I can add a notability bit myself. -- Banjeboi 16:29, 15 March 2009 (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.