Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sensitron 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 speedy delete. —Korath (Talk) 03:29, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
Sensitron[edit]
- Restored from speedy. It was recreated. It was deleted according to the previous vote at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sensitron. IMO the vote was done without due diligency. The company has HUGE number of gioogle hits. On the other hand, the number of voters was IMO insufficient to justify deletion. Their reasons are poorly grounded: "advertising". The article states mere facts and has no hype. Mikkalai 08:39, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Comment (Rl 12:08, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC))
- The "HUGE number" of Google hits are for other companies with the same name.
- During the previous VfD, the creator of the article removed the VfD notice, voted under a wrong name, and blanked the VfD page. I am not really ecstatic about giving him a stage once more.
- FWIW, the article that I remember from the previous VfD read a lot more like a sales pitch.
- Yes, probably the original version. But the deleted one was basically like this one. Mikkalai 22:09, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- copyvio/advert from [1] speedy delete DDerby 13:55, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete again as noted, the respectable Google hits are for other companies. A search for their one and only product (at least, the only one mentioned in the article) brings 67 unique Google hits link and they have a very low current Alexa ranking of 4,189,365. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:41, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete again; if you think the original deletion was unfounded, shouldn't this be on WP:VFU instead? Radiant_* 16:43, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Speedy deleted as re-creation of material previously voted for deletion. Mikkalai, please list on VfU if you believe the VfD process was improper. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:54, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Well, at least this vote is talking more seriously than the previous one, so I will not go for VfU. Mikkalai 22:09, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Speedy deleted as re-creation of material previously voted for deletion. Mikkalai, please list on VfU if you believe the VfD process was improper. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:54, 9 Apr 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.