Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GeMagic

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. Will salt of recreated.--Húsönd 01:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GeMagic

GeMagic (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Contested 'db-advert' speedy delete. Non-notable product with no media references cited by article author, unlike article for comparable product Bedazzler. Delete. StoptheDatabaseState 00:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete camp value does not equal notability ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 00:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable and doesn't satisfy WP:CORP. TSO1D 00:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy. -- Chris is me 01:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The statement in the article that it is not advertising does not make it so. Verging on {{db-spam}}--Anthony.bradbury 01:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I removed the disclaimer that it's not advertising from the page, as it appeared to be a pre-emptive AfD comment, and instead I'm posting it here. While it was in the original edit, I felt that it violated the general practice of not posting content disclaimers. If it is truely not advertising, then it's Neutrality should be apparent from the article itself. The disclaimer read (for information purposes) as follows: "There are pages for the Bedazzler and Magic Bullet appliance with the same general information and they are not deleted. This is an article that provides information on the product. It is not a form of advertising" To me this is an AfD comment made before the fact, and not appropriate for a mainspace article, as they attempt to cite comparisons in the introduction to the article itself. Wintermut3 02:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

These comments were left over from when the original author put on the {{hangon}} tag, before I resorted to AfD. StoptheDatabaseState 09:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per above. MER-C 03:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and this isn't an ad... or is it? SkierRMH,06:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as advertising. JIP | Talk 08:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete as obvious advertising for a non-notable product. - Smerdis of Tlön 16:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete This should have been speedied as Advert. If it wants to stay, we need to fix the NPOV issues FirefoxMan 16:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I thought it was a computer graphics card from Taiwan before I actually read the thing. Clearly fails WP:CORP Orderinchaos78 17:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as insufficiently notable per WP:CORP#Criteria for products and services. Product has not "been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself." -- Satori Son 17:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as advert. I would have Speedied it as spam. Doc Tropics 18:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. nn notable.--Dakota 22:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and salt bad penny. twice has been this spam been erased. Keep it away from wikiedia for good. Ohconfucius 10:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - article reads as a advertisement. -- Whpq 15:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

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.