Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electronic cigarettes in Australia

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 merge to Regulation of electronic cigarettes#Other countries. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:27, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic cigarettes in Australia[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable topic with few sources, no similar articles, and no apparent notability. No purpose to it; easily can be redirected elsewhere. ––Redditaddict69 ^(talk) ^(contribs) 22:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. DannyS712 (talk) 22:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. ––Redditaddict69 ^(talk) ^(contribs) 22:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (Even a bold speedy one?) Not notable in its own right. Completely redundant. Already much better covered at Regulation of electronic cigarettes#Other countries. At best a redirect to that. Aoziwe (talk) 23:02, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Notability refutation - an odd statement, but I feel notability is clearly established, despite the few sources - specifically the 1st and 3rd, which have such comprehensive "background" consideration that Sig Cov is easily covered. What is more up for grabs is Aoziwe's CONTENTFORK argument - I'm unsure of my viewpoint on that, so I'm leaving it un!voted on, at this point. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 23:21, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article is a content fork. Regulation of electronic cigarettes#Other countries covers it in better detail. There is no Electronic cigarettes in the US or the UK. Therefore, there is no reason to keep this article. @Redditaddict69: there is another content fork. See Marketing_of_electronic_cigarettes. See discussion on talk page. See Talk:Marketing_of_electronic_cigarettes#Issues_have_not_been_resolved. QuackGuru (talk) 01:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Redditaddict69: do you think the content fork or POV fork should be nominated for deletion or redirected at this time? See Marketing_of_electronic_cigarettes. See discussion on talk page. See Talk:Marketing_of_electronic_cigarettes#Issues_have_not_been_resolved. QuackGuru (talk) 21:34, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Regulation_of_electronic_cigarettes#Other_countries. That seems to be an appropriate place for currently existing information. Burroughs'10 (talk) 18:32, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any unique content to Regulation of electronic cigarettes#Other countries. That should be the most appropriate place. Unoc (talk) 12:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge As other users have pointed it out, I favor a merge too, the article does not hold enough weight on its own.Garlicolive (talk) 01:18, 25 March 2019 (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.