Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Floating wave power plant


 * 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   merge to Wave power. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Floating wave power plant

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable: I cannot find news paper articles on this technology and company, see e.g. this search. -- Crowsnest (talk) 00:43, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge - The manufacturer of a product that harnesses this energy is not significant to the article. There are other articles that contain much of the same information such as Wave power. The graphics provided would also serve well on the Wave Power article.  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  16:20, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Ivec01 - News and TV news can be found on http://www.youtube.com/AdvancedWavePower and on http://www.advancedwavepower.com. Floating wave power plant is a new and most efficient ocean wave energy converter. I think it deserves to have own page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivec01 (talk • contribs) 05:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * — Ivec01 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I have tones of test data. Two large marine engineering companies do commercial design for Bass Straight. Please help me to improve Floating Wave Power Plant article. I really do not have editor experience but have plenty of data, video and images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivec01 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * But do you have reliable sources? Unless the plant has been written about in newspapers, journals, books, or other such sources that are independent of the subject, it fails the general notability guidelines. —C.Fred (talk) 05:23, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge selected content to Wave power. As Golgofrinchian noted, some of the images and content may be usable in another article. However, given that the article was created by, and given that the majority of links go to ivec.com.au, I have grave concerns about this article. At best, there's just an editor with a conflict of interest favouring links for his company. At worst, it's an outright spam attempt. However, it does look like there's some baby in the bathwater here that can be used elsewhere. —C.Fred (talk) 05:20, 18 March 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.