Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dynacell


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 14:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Dynacell

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article unreferenced, and sounds like blatant OR and POV. There *is* a company called "Dynacell" out there (dynacellcorp.com), but I can't see anything resembling a Duracell knock-off, so it's probably a different company with the same name. I suspect that *this* "Dynacell" is just a ten-a-penny pseudo-brand used by a generic Far East manufacturer. However, that I am having to guess this much in the absence of sources is indication enough that this article should be deleted. Fourohfour 17:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as completely unsourced. DarkAudit 18:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, as the only Dynacell I found was the same one as mentioned above, and this company doesn't seem to make duracell-like batteries. Also, it is unsourced.  KJS  77  19:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. In addition to the other problems, it was created by User:Chloride who has been banned. Some of you may want to check his other contributions as well. Academic Challenger 21:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment; have gone over most of his/her edits and reverted them, tagging most of the rest as dubious. Given quality of Chloride's contributions in general, I think erring on the side of removal is justified. Fourohfour 13:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable product in any case. DGG 04:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected about the value of a possible article. DGG 00:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete There's an article waiting to be written about DynaCell, but this ain't it. DynaCell was actually a trademark belong to, Circuit Semantics an electronics company based in San Jose.  I'm going to guess they died and East Penn manufacturing snapped up the brand. Chris Croy 16:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Abstain When i have the time to do the research im going to create a better article on the company, Including history and photos of the battery package (they do sell them at a nearby dollar store, and they are as described in the article.) I have a picture if anyone is interested, but the picture quality is poor wich is why i havent incuded it in the article. when I make the full article i will be starting from scratch. I have personally tested the batteries, and under similar loads and conditions, they are having a life expectancy of 1/12th that of energizer. (lasting 12 hours powering a small led fashlight, compared to 140-150 with energizer) Enigmar 03:08, 15 May 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.