Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silvercrest SL65

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 No consensus. Kungfu Adam (talk) 20:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Silvercrest SL65

Silvercrest SL65 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:CORP. Contested prod. MER-C 04:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Rewrite and Rename - the parent company has several products, this one has 20,000 ghits in multiple languages. I would suggest this be re-written as the parent company, with the products given their own sections. Also, this reads too much like an ad. SkierRMH,07:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - Silvercrest (in the home technology context) appears to be a brand name of Lidl, so if necessary, deal with it as a subsection of that.Ace of Risk 16:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - But why does anyone wants an article with the details and functions of an unknown product? Maybe it looks like an ad but without mentioning the brand (silvercrest) of the receiver this is of no use to anyone. This shouldn't be deleted because there's no other article of wikipedia regarding this FTA receiver and it is very difficult for people to find a good structured information on google about this. AR PcPro • contribs) 18:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
  • Delete. This article is about a product range from a single retail chain. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a catalogue. Under no circumstances should this article be merged with that of the retail chain: we don't detail products carried by other stores, nor should we here. To suggest, as an earlier participant in this discussion has, that this article shouldn't be deleted because there's no other article about this product in Wikipedia is to entirely misunderstand what encyclopedias are for. My own view is that this is an obvious "speedy". WMMartin 20:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Larry V (talk | contribs) 10:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, as this appears to be advertising. Charlie 10:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep/Cleanup useful product information, I doubt its advertising since real advertisers would do a better job with the article. --64.230.127.234 21:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - I agree that the encyclopaedia is not a catalog. But when I search for something on an encyclopaedia I expect to find information about it, whatever the matter.

I haven’t understood yet why you want to delete this. If it’s because it could be advertising in that case let’s also delete all articles with individual products of several brands. For example when I search for Nokia 6630 it’s advertising to Nokia isn’t it???? Or if I search for Sony VAIO…But let’s suppose it is advertising and I’m here promoting this item. If someone specifically searches for it, then it is because it wants to know information about it, either with the intention of buying it or not. And my view is that the role of an encyclopaedia is to provide information to people. Plus this receiver is not sold exclusively on that particular chain. It’s a Comag receiver sold on many satellite stores around.

AR PcPro 24 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep I think, the matter is if this article must be deleted or not. But not rewritten (perhaps made more accurate, or little changes)... If we look for what means Encyclopedia I find the following:

-An encyclopedia, encyclopaedia or (traditionally) encyclopædia,[1] is a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge or a particular branch of knowledge.

In this case, I find that this article gives knowledge about a specific product, quite popular in the Satellite receivers world, and whose info available in the net, is spread and confuse. I found this article in the net, and was very useful for me... OK... I can accept an "traditional" encyclopedia is not a catalogue, but Wikipedia is not a traditional one. It has pages with thousands of "devices", like cameras : Canon_XL-2, computers : Icube, Mobile phones Nokia_6230, cars Seat_Ibiza.... And so on.... is TRULY easy to find popular brand+model items on wikipedia, and they offer knowledge about popular devices, products, items of our life.... When a item is not popular enough to appear on wikipedia? I don't know ... It its because lack of popularity.... Someone can explain me why those products mobile phones/cars can be on wikipedia, and this not?? .... Nevertheless... I think is OBVIOUSLY not an ADVERTISEMENT, even is difficult to find/buy itself because their marketing techniques... and it uses a very objective language --

pismak 02:01, 25 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.