Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1

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. John254 01:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1[edit]

{{prod}} removed with a long explanation on the talk page. The article remains almost completely unreferenced, and reads like an advertisement. There's no claim to notability in the article itself, and the article itself mentions none of the points raised on the talk page. Wikipedia is not a digital camera catalog, and Wikipedia is not a catalog of Panasonic products. Mikeblas (talk) 16:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the WikiProject Photography talk page. — Becksguy (talk) 01:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge + redirect to Lumix - merging would be the best option. I don't think however that it was a PRODable article as the deletion of these articles are fairly controversial. I do believe that the notability of products such as digital cameras and mobile phones should be taken to policy-level, rather than ad hoc AfDs. EJF (talk) 17:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - and object to procedure. The article was tagged with {{prod}} on 12 Feb. 2008. The {{prod}} tag specifies, "... You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason. To avoid confusion, it helps to explain why you object to the deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page." (My emphasis) On 15 Feb. 2008 I did just that, I removed the {{prod}} tag and I wrote a detailed explanation why I thought the article should not be deleted. I even requested to be notified if it was really necessary for me to work on the article to avoid its deletion. Instead, the article was nominated for deletion on 18 Feb., and my following the rules is now ridiculed as "... {{prod}} removed with a long explanation on the talk page...". Hope it can be understood that this is not appreciated by an editor who is trying to improve Wikipedia. I would like to suggest that this AfD be canceled, and I'll do what I can to improve the article, OK? Thanks. --RenniePet (talk) 18:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep This is a highly notable camera for several reasons. One of the first Four Thirds System cameras on the market, the first from Panasonic, first DSLR camera from Panasonic, one of the first live preview cameras (which was copied by others, as RenniePet pointed out on the talk page), and the first from Panasonic, and a long anticipated camera release in this semi-professional class. I have been following this camera from it's first pre-production press leak several years ago until now. Lens is by Leica, the legendary and famous German camera maker, as commented on in some reviews. The New York Times mentions the camera in an article on DSLR cameras [1]. I added that and another ref from NYT to article, as well as a couple of reviews. It clearly passes WP:N with the refs. The fact that comments that support notability are in the talk page but have not yet been incorporated in the article does not justify deletion, as that's an issue for improvement by editing. For the billionth time, AfD is not clean up. Those articles that can be improved are not canidates for deletion, per WP:DP policy. However, I will agree with EJF that not every camera or cell phone is a notable product, per se. Something needs to make them notable, and that notability has been shown for this camera as a defining camera. I wouldn't make the same arguments for the DMC-L10, for example, as it's a successor to the DMC-L1, and is not defining. — Becksguy (talk) 22:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I don't see how being associated with a particular lens system makes this camera notable. Improving this article won't make it's subject more notable, and won't change Wikipedia's policies about product cataloging. -- Mikeblas (talk) 04:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. It all depends on what turns you on, I suppose. For a camera enthousiast it's product details like this that makes life worth living. :-)

Anyway, for what it's worth I've just used about 1 1/2 hours rewriting and expanding the article. So I sure hope I haven't wasted my valuable time. --RenniePet (talk) 07:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable commercial product for which a lot of sources exist. Nomination is a boilerplate nomination showing no consideration of the merits of the specific article. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I completely agree with Matthew Brown's comment about boilerplate nominations. The New York Times article (ref above) on three new dSLR cameras devotes about 36% (514 words) of the article to the DMC-L1 and David Pogue used the word "startling" (as in, according to one definition: "so remarkably different or sudden as to cause momentary shock or alarm") to describe the camera. From his article: And Panasonic, intent on claiming some of the exploding S.L.R. market for itself, will introduce its first model: the startling Lumix L1, which will cost $2,000 with Leica’s first image-stabilizing lens. In terms of notability, from WP:N: A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. That NYT ref, together with the reviews and other refs, makes the DMC-L1 camera highly notable based on reliable, independent, and significant coverage. The DMC-L1 camera is a defining camera, with several firsts in a new camera class, and has received significant coverage. And as such it is notable, not just because it's "associated with a particular lens system". And product cataloging does not apply here. I am not arguing that all Panasonic Lumix cameras (about 42 models listed in the Lumix article) each deserve articles, since I haven't looked at each of them, but this one very obviously and clearly does. I might also suggest that editors with appropriate expert knowledge may be in a better position to judge the merits of this kind of article. The excellent rework of the article by RenniePet also completely solidifies the camera's notability, per WP:HEY. I added some refs also. — Becksguy (talk) 10:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Article is now referenced; camera is notable as it's the subject of multiple independent sources. Also, it's the first digital SLR from Panasonic. Spacepotato (talk) 06:40, 22 February 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.