Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Current and Voltage Surge Suppressors (CVSS™)


 * 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 delete. The concerns regarding sourcing, original research and notability remain largely unaddressed.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Current and Voltage Surge Suppressors (CVSS™)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Apparent blatant advertising. Not speedying, as there's potentially a valid article about the technology buried in the puff-piece; however as it stands this is unkeepable, and I'm not in a position to clean it up —  iride scent   (talk to me!)  12:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Appears to contain much original research Yngvarr (t) (c) 13:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Frankly (not to be biased), it is not apparent to me that the content included is advertising. But I am willing to learn why and how. Is it because I have not explained the technology detailed enough? Or that because it is still a new thing, not many people have heard/written/researched about it, hence the content is deemed less "reliable" and more "advertising"? I'm not trying to pick a fight here, I really just want to find out how I can contribute better. And I'm raising these questions because it really is not obvious to me how the content is considered as "advertising". So please enlighten me. Thank you. Ryantan 14:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Article appears to contain much original research, and does not cite reliable sources. Article needs to be wikified, as well.  All third-party sources cited are for other technologies, and not the subject at hand.  Give author time to clean it up.  If concerns cannot be addressed (especially OR and NS), will switch to delete.  -- Mike  Vitale  16:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments. I will try to work on it. Ryantan 19:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with Ryantan... this isn't advertising. If it is advertising, it should at least have mentioned that a company called "Innovolt" is marketing this.  A news release from Georgia Tech, where Deepak Divan designed this partiuclar suppressor, speaks to the marketing.  Mandsford 01:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of establishment of notability through the provision of multiple, reliable, independent sources. Skimming the ghits, I see nothing outside of blogs, wikis, and official documentation/press releases.  I'll be pleased to change my vote if someone can show otherwise.  This is an emerging technology though, so I also have no prejudice against letting it sit in userspace until notability exists, if ever.  Someguy1221 02:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * KeepIt was an interesting article, and I can't see what the fuss is about. Bugsy 14:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Some information ,but intended as advertising a particular commercial product. The TM in the title is indicative.DGG (talk) 22:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The subject of this TM-splattered article gets almost no Ghits, indicating that it has not become a notable product. -- Groggy Dice T | C 03:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete clearly advertising doesn't the ubiquitous TM make it blatant enough for everyone? Carlossuarez46 21:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sounds like advertising, and this is apparently not a widely-known product, according to Google. This topic area may be worthy of being covered, but not in a way that restricts the article to covering a single product. Also we have no third-party sources, independent of the maker, to show that this particular product is notable. EdJohnston 02:55, 29 September 2007 (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.