Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of consumer brain–computer interfaces

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. WP:NPASR. The arguments for keeping are weak but two !votes just aren't enough to get an article deleted against opposition. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of consumer brain–computer interfaces[edit]

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

This page (it is not an encyclopedia article) is one big bucket of WP:OR, with unsourced or an OR assembly of content sourced to company product websites. There is only one independent source in the whole mess. It has been cleaned up some but see how it was. Even now it is basically a bunch of competing advertisements, and it remains a spam magnet. Jytdog (talk) 21:35, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. I Googled "home EEG machine" and this came up. If I had a hard copy encyclopedia I would want some kind of article on EEG machines a consumer can use.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 18:17, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia =/= Consumer reports. We can only have articles where there are multiple, independent reliable sources. This article is 100% WP:OR sourced to company websites. Jytdog (talk) 01:03, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not a consmuer report. An article stating home use is now possible due to inexpensive technology and how many are sold. Maybe a subsection of the main EEG article.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 15:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete falls somewhere between WP:NOT#OR and WP:NOTCATALOG. Either way, there's no reason to keep or merge. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:30, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: On track for deletion, but one last check that there are no redemptive qualities worth merging anywhere czar 19:01, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 19:01, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, and possibly merge - this is a very useful and well referenced page. Perhaps it should be merged into a different page, such as Brain–computer interface (although this page is already quite long), but it should not be deleted. Danski14^(talk) 18:07, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your !vote does not respond to the policy-violations upon which this whole article is built. Jytdog (talk) 19:06, 4 January 2017 (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.