Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athalite


 * 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 of the debate was No consensus. Rx StrangeLove 06:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Athalite
A patented material used here to advertize a brand of soldering iron. -R. fiend 17:58, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: borderline notability, plus the fact that is patented does not warrant deletion. It doesn't read as a _blatant_ advertisement either. -- Rune Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; | Esperanza  20:27, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, according to our article here on patents, there have been well over 100,000 patents granted in the US alone. To me, that doesn't in itself warrant inclusion. As for not being an ad, well a single line whose sole purpose is to mention a minor consumer product more or less is an ad, whether it reads like one or not. Something needn't be dripping with praise to advertize. Ask any company that endorses NASCAR. -R. fiend 21:49, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * While I agree on your comment about advertisement, you also have to realise that the patent thing is used as an argument for deletion, which is not. The fact is, Wikipedia has articles on patented materials and one can even argue than an invention granted a patent may be notable enough just for being, well, an invention. As a side comment, the graph in the patent article shows patents granted per year in the U.S., so the total number of granted patents clearly exceeds 100,000 (and is in fact around a few million already). -- Rune Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; | Esperanza  22:01, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 100,000 did seem awful low. I should read things more carefully. Anyway, I didn't mean to imply it being a patent was a reason for deletion, just that a patent is really all it says it is, and that being one of several million patents is not a claim of notability. Obviously we have articles on patented items (phonograph is certainly not going to show up as a redlink). -R. fiend 22:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Indeed :-). I edited my comment slightly to make it a bit clearer too. -- Rune Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; | Esperanza  22:26, 21 October 2005 (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.