Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Courtesy telephone


 * 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   keep. The concerns raised by the nominator have been addressed through normal editing of the article, to the effect that notability is now demonstrated. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  02:16, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Courtesy telephone

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't seem to be a notable concept (I've been unable to find any significant coverage after searching several sources; most instances of the phrase seem to refer to courtesy when speaking on telephones rather than to this specific subject), and the article is really clutching at straws for things to say: "Courtesy telephones generally have a distinctive colour..." ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Not-content  ─╢ 19:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Added two references. As the nominator noted there are not many books or news atories with lengthy discussion, because it seems pretty well known in modern society. It shows up as a dramatic device in fiction orders of magnitude more often (per Google Book search) than one finds explanations of how it works or its history. Edison (talk) 20:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is similar to emergency telephone which doesn't have much in the way of sources either. Toll-free telephone number isn't much better.  But the worst case for these various telephony articles is that we merge them into telephone because turning commonplace topics like this into redlinks would be counter-productive - editors would soon recreate them.  Myself, I'm curious to know why courtesy phones always seem to be white - where did that come from?  Warden (talk) 20:41, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * We could all have done without the other shit exists argument really... ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  without portfolio  ─╢ 20:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * We could have done without this discussion altogether. Please see our deletion policy which states emphatically, "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD.". Warden (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per Colonel Warden, unwarranted nomination, notable topic in its small way, enhances encyclopedia. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - much improved since nomination and has been demonstrated to be notable. Bridgeplayer (talk) 00:21, 17 July 2011 (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.