Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SEFA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Mailer Diablo 16:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SEFA

It's an advertisement. Fails WP:CORP and WP:SPAM and WP:V Mattisse 13:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep. It is not an advertisement. I have no connection with the firm who made it or with anyone who sells it. If Mattisse's argument holds, we will have to delete hundreds of articles describing manufactured tradenamed articles and tools and equipment including just about every article on gunshop-available guns and items of scuba gear and makes of vehicles and powered garden tools. My information came from a British mine rescue team who used them, and see http://www.therebreathersite.nl/Zuurstofrebreathers/English/sabre_sef.htm . The SEFA breathing set for many years was a main kit item for British mines rescue men. Mines rescue is worthy and notable, more than the mass of pop music singers and fictional characters that there are so many pages about. Anthony Appleyard 13:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete Looks very much like an advert, and the wording does not help. --Bschott 14:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, so long as notability is established. Is it the most popular item of this type or something like that? By the way, if you read it, it doesn't sound like an ad. AdamBiswanger1 14:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Obscure but legitimate topic. Note that the product is no longer made so the article is certainly not an ad and it reads nothing like one in any case. Landolitan 18:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - if you click on breathing set mentioned above by Anthony Appleyard you get to a disambiguation page which give you the choice of SCBA - a better written article on the same subject already existing on Wikipedia. Anthony Appleyard - thanks! Capit 23:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - therefore is my vote per nom. Plus external links that ask you to sign their guestbook really are not what WP:V means. Capit 23:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. SEFA specifically describes the SEFA rebreather breathing set. SCBA describes industrial breathing sets in general. I do not see that either article is "better" than the other; they are about different parts of the topic.
Mine rescue mentions SCBA: it does not go into details about them. It also points to some makes of SCBA, including the SEFA.
http://www.therebreathersite.nl/Zuurstofrebreathers/English/sabre_sef.htm (the link that Capit objected to) points to a good description of the SEFA breathing set. Its link to a guestbook to sign, is irrelevant here. I am not going to refuse a link to a very good informative external site merely because the external page pointed to has a link to a guestbook tacked on its end. Anthony Appleyard 04:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Landolitan. Aye-Aye 20:32, 25 July 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.