Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autococker

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —Korath (Talk) 01:40, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Autococker

Vanity? Advertising? Non-notable, anyway. RickK 08:02, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

no vote - Secret option D, none of the above. :-P I'm not quite sure how it would be vanity, and I'm not affiliated with any of the companies who make a profit from the Autococker. Write it off as non-notable if you like, but if you want to do that, you should probably put up the rest of Category:Paintball for deletion as well. I saw Angel (paintball) (an Angel is a specific type of paintball marker (gun)) in there, with a comparitively sucky amount of information, and it lives. An Autococker is a specific type of paintball marker as well, and it is unrivaled popularity wise in the sport of paintball so I felt it needed an entry (I'll try to do a few more for other markers once I get all the information for this filled in). Finally, maybe it isn't notable for you, but for someone who happened to be interested in paintball, it sure as hell would be. Kobold 10:59, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - Looks useful for people interested in paintball. If you want to delete this you may as well delete all that Star Wars junk too -- except this has a real world application. Robinoke 11:54, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep seems to be useful enough. Kobold, I recommend you finish an article in your own user space before posting it to avoid having it deleted straight away. And please start the article by explaining what an autococker is with a definition in the first line. Mgm|^(talk) 12:30, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This could be of interest to paintball fans. Binadot 16:39, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Needs work, but keep - David Gerard 19:36, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but should possibly have the title changed to be more descriptive. RJFJR 22:37, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
• Is the Wikipedia:Google test a fair barometer in this instance? When one takes into consideration that we've kept a number of minor articles which garnered less than twenty (20) googles, how is importance and notability not being demonstrated in this article? --GRider\^talk 17:20, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.