Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unilease

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 delete. Cirt (talk) 00:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unilease[edit]

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

A non-notable product. Wikipedia shouldn't list every type of penetrating oil on the market. Wizard191 (talk) 21:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - we really need an expert to chime in on this rather obscure product. Bearian (talk) 21:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm an expert on the subject, but I'm familiar with most topics on mechanical engineering, metalworking, manufacturing, etc., and I can say I've never heard of this product. Wizard191 (talk) 23:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice. The article fails not only the notability test, but the sourcing test as well. JBsupreme (talk) 23:12, 25 January 2010 (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.