Talk:Cambo camera

PROD declined
I strongly disagree that Cambo fails to meet notability. The article is barely a stub, and definitely needs improvement, but then again, it's only a few days old. There are far more questionable articles that have not been similarly criticized. I also agree that it leans too heavily on the manufacturer's web site, but the Sinar article has the same problem, and anyone who would recommend deleting that article rather than improving it is just plain nuts. This article was largely taken intact from Camerapedia.org; we can either direct the reader there, away from Wikipedia or send them here—I'd opt for the latter. So let's improve rather than delete; though I've been familiar with the brand for over 30 years, I don't have enough direct knowledge to be of much help. JeffConrad (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I am very sory to disturb you in your work, but I really would like stop this page for the nomination of deletion. Did I remove the Template:Proposed deletion/dated correct? Could you maybe help me by giving me some advise how to improve this page? I would really apricceciate your help. -- Milendria (talk) 11:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Milendria http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cambo_camera&action=edit
 * The prod was declined correctly. The article isn't a subject of deletion at the moment. In order to improve the article you 'll first need to add references/inline citations, etc. Reed more on Article development. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)