Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electrical Installation Guide


 * 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.  SilkTork  *YES! 20:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Electrical Installation Guide

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

unremarkable wiki noq (talk) 20:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:32, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability. No sources. Borderline for speedy deletion as db-web. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:02, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep This page is created by the authorised personnel of Schneider Electric which also holds all the copyrights of this WIKI:EIG (Electrical Installation Guide) and the paper version. The information found on this page is exactly similar to the WIKI-EIG and as mentioned by Schneider Eletcric. 12:23, 19 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mssudeep fr (talk • contribs)
 * Comment That is not a reason to keep the page - it does show however a WP:conflict of interest. noq (talk) 12:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

There is no publicity of any products and even of the company itself (the logo of Schneider Electric is the size of 'Mediawiki logo' found on some of the pages of wikipedia and at the extreme bottom.) In addition, there is no mention of competitors too. The information is clearly explained with the diagram and has neutral view. You may visit the WIKI:EIG if you doubt about the authenticity and the neutral view. The WIKI:EIG is open for all to add and collaborate, whether it is competitors, installers or end users. Mssudeep fr (talk) 12:49, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Some of the pages which contains similar information already exists on wikipedia but it is not as detailed and do not tackles all the issues and solutions concerning Electrical Installation. Therefore, this page which leads to the WIKI will be helpful. This wiki has been written by and for electrical engineers and in compliance with intarnational standards of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).


 * Delete - the content of this article is focused on the Wiki. My own opinion is that the current wording is promotional in nature.  "We all hope that you, the user, will find this wiki EIG genuinely helpful."  The lede does state that "until 12/2009 [it was] an exclusive Schneider-Electric publication distributed through printing and internet".  The book exists but I cannot find any indication that this is a notable book.  But it may be so in its field.  If there are sources that can demonstrate that this book is one of the fundmamental electrical engieneering texts, then it could be kept as an article with the focus ont he book rather than the promotion of a related wiki. -- Whpq (talk) 13:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete At best it's based on a single source that may or may not fit WP:RS but in any case that source doesn't establish notability in any way. A google search for the term in the news yields 0 results. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

http://wapedia.mobi/en/switchgear www.proz.com/kudoz/english_to_portuguese/engineering_general/3840406-bolted_short_circuit_current.html www.nooutage.com/vdrop.htm www.educypedia.be/electronics/emc-emi.htm www.educypedia.be/electronics/safety.htm bubl.ac.uk/link/e/electricalengineering.htm Mssudeep fr (talk) 08:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Here are some of the websites which use WIKI EIG as their reference:


 * Comment - I removed the line "We all hope that....". Also i would like to drag the attention of Whpq to the line next to "until 12/2009 [it was] an exclusive Schneider-Electric publication distributed through printing and internet", which is "The new WIKI-EIG is now allowing all external contribution for improvement and update. This is a major evolution towards neutral knowledge and exchange." Mssudeep fr (talk) 09:14, 23 July 2010 (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.