Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GammaFax

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. Snowing. (non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts (talk • stalk • she/they) 18:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GammaFax[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)

Very short page, only just the lead. Non-notable product. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 23:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 23:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Computing. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:33, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Probably notable, but this is a stub that needs more. [1] and [2] are both fairly extensive coverage of this computer peripheral. Oaktree b (talk) 01:41, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per sources presented here and in the article. Other sources:
InfoWorld, volume 8, issue 35, 1.9.1986, p. 9.

InfoWorld, volume 12, issue 32, 6.8.1990, pp. 59, 62, 63, 66, 70, 71. (comparison of several products)

PC Mag, 27.1.1987, volume 6, number 2, p. 36.

PC Mag, 28.6.1988, volume 7, number 12, pp. 190, 193, 198.

I will add this poor article to my to-do list (note playing video games takes too much of my free time). Pavlor (talk) 08:36, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I would argue that by virtue of it being the first personal computer fax board, it meets WP:GNG. GSK (talk • edits) 15:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Significant, in-depth coverage in multiple mainstream secondary sources cited above more than meets WP:NPRODUCT. Owen× ☎ 22:59, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Credible claim to notability backed up by a few sources. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see many non-trivial sources which can be used. Lightburst (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2024 (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.