Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logitech Attack 3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. I don't see a firm consensus for merging the content, but one can be formed later outside of the AfD process. --jonny-mt 03:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Logitech Attack 3[edit]
- Logitech Attack 3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Fails WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:NOTMANUAL, WP:IINFO variously. Does not establish notability in any respect. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 21:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, Wikipedia is not a product guide - unless notability for this particular one is demonstrated. Possibly merge if there is a suitable place for it, but I can't find one. Terraxos (talk) 02:51, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, lifebaka (talk - contribs) 21:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete What makes this any more notable than the next? Unless notability can be asserted, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Jkasd 05:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Logitech#Products. No claim in article of enough notability for a stand-alone article. (Delete would be my second choice.)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 13:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or merge and redirect without deletion. Notable company, so reasonable chance such products are covered in game magazine previews/reviews (I've seen Logitech products in such magazines in the past). --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 17:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I think it meets the notability guidelines. [1] [2]. RMHED (talk) 18:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Alright, there is some coverage. However, I don't think it's of the appropriate nature to pass WP:PRODUCT. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 20:26, 2 August 2008 (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.