Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sony Ericsson V800

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. Moreschi ^{If you've written a quality article...} 13:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sony Ericsson V800[edit]

Non-notable commercial product. Notability supported only by product reviews. Too few substantial references exist to support a viable Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not a cell phone directory, and Wikipedia is also not a Sony Ericsson catalog. Mikeblas (talk) 11:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. What a wretched article. The subject may be noteable, but the article will need a complete re-write if it's kept. Majoreditor (talk) 16:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep—adequate references available; appears notable. Spacepotato (talk) 19:42, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete About the only thing with inline references is that it is a clamshell in form. The article is full of apparent original research about its shortcomings and nature. The references do not satisfy WP:N. Wikipedia is not a celphone catalog or a celphone blog. Edison (talk) 03:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Without touching on the merits of this article, numerous mentions above of "Wikipedia is not a directory of cellphones" prompt me to wonder about the existence of Nokia products, and similar on the bottom of every Sony-Ericsson cellphone page, every Motorola cellphone page. Certainly Wikipedia is not a directory thereof, but one can hardly be questioned for following a well-established practice. Why is this particular phone singled out for deletion? Achromatic (talk) 01:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. This phone has hardly been singled out. Read through the AfD archives to find other phones that have gone through the process. Even if they hadn't been put up, it's not possible to edit all the articles on the encyclopedia at once. If someone fixes a typo in an article, do you ask them why they singled-out that particular typo? Just because a "practice" is common-place doesn't make it correct or desirable. -- Mikeblas (talk) 19:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It's referenced. --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, none of the references explain why this particular model of mobile phone is notable. Lankiveil (talk) 00:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Delete - a pile of facts and figures mostly unsourced. Nothing here in the way of reliable sources to underpin notability. Most of the page fails WP:V. BlueValour (talk) 01:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is a non-notable commercial product. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In the past, I have supported phone articles when WP:V sources exist. Googling for reviews of this phone, I find them, even if the current ones need some supplementing. At any rate, I believe it meets notability requires, and hence support keeping it. SorryGuy Talk 03:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Its no more notable than any one of hundreds of other "new" phones. Mbisanz (talk) 08:02, 24 December 2007 (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.