Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ecodan


 * 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 soft delete‎ __EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit  14:27, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Ecodan

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Not a notable topic. It is written like an advertisement, and most of the page is unsourced. 𝕒𝕥𝕠𝕞𝕚𝕔𝕕𝕣𝕒𝕘𝕠𝕟𝟙𝟛𝟞 🗨️ 🖊️ 14:17, 21 April 2023 (UTC)


 * delete The three sources used for this, one is the company's own site, another is an article written by the product manager for the product, and the third mentions the brand as an aside. So no sign given of notability. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2023 (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.