Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dell 320SLi

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 redirect to Dell laptops. Tone 17:57, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dell 320SLi[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)

Only claim to fame is that it had faulty components that led to recall. I cannot find any logical place to merge the content, which does have notability. However being a stub I question whether the orphaned article should remain. Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Edits) 02:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Edits) 02:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I’ve wondered about putting this article up for deletion several times. As you say it does only seem notable for its recall, but the reason I left it is that the recall does seem to have attracted a lot of coverage in the press. Mccapra (talk) 06:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The useful merge/redirect target would be Dell laptops or Dell laptop timelines which might make a more useful article. The content is mildly interesting but not for a standalone article.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have just created a draft Draft:Dell laptops. I may or may not choose to develop it, and welcome if others did. It is not at this moment suitable for mainspace. But it would I think be a suitable merge target for Dell 320SLi.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Old computer, there are RS about it, no harm in keeping the article. Coverage 10 years after the event shows at least some marginal notability (well, infamy) of this product. I´m leaning to keep. Pavlor (talk) 09:32, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It's a laptop known solely for its recall. Even if there were any sources for it other than its heating problems, it's still the generic computer coverage that you would see from CNET or a computer magazine. –eggofreason^{(talk · contribs)} 19:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is at least some claim of notability (hailed as one of the two first subnotebooks by the PC Mag, 27 October 1992, p. 128: [1]; depends on a defintion of subnotebook of course). Subnotebook article may be also a good redirect target. There are enough reliable sources to expand the article beyond stub state. Pavlor (talk) 05:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hugsyrup (talk) 08:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not seeing a reason to delete. If an article is short then this is not a problem – "enough is as good as a feast". See also WP:TLDR. Andrew D. (talk) 09:08, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:16, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All the coverage is obligate articles in industry press, thus fails WP:AUD as a corporate product. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Dell laptops. Djm-leighpark (talk) 16:19, 2 August 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.