Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glass diatonic harmonica


 * 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 Harmonica. The Bushranger One ping only 00:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Glass diatonic harmonica

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no evidence anywhere of notability. The article is sourced only to the manufacturer's web site, and searches have found nothing better. For example, the first few Google hits are this Wikipedia article, another Wikipedia article, a Wikipedia talk page, a page on a site for glass artists to publicise their work, MySpace, a personal web page created by the creator of the "glass diatonic harmonica", a link to wikirage which is currently a dead link, and so on and so on... (A PROD was removed by an editor who gave an edit summary saying "I'm not sure of its notability".) JamesBWatson (talk) 09:25, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Having tried hard to save this article I am forced to agree with you, but suggest that an excerpt be merged into Harmonica per the existing merge flags rather that deleting baby and bathwater. Fiddle   Faddle  09:55, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there any evidence that "Glass diatonic harmonica" is significant or notable enough to be included in any article? JamesBWatson (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: My reading of the description of the object is that only the cover plates of this harmonica are glass, which might deserve an addition to the main article on Harmonicas but nothing more. FigureArtist (talk) 13:38, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge with Harmonica, as above. Doesn't appear to have enough reliable sourcing to have its own article. Nwlaw63 (talk) 19:20, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I would still like to see one or other of the editors who suggest a merge tell us what about this is notable enough to even be included in the article Harmonica. As far as I can see, nobody but the manufacturer has ever given any coverage to it at all. If someone else has done so, please let us know who, and where. What exactly would be merged? The statement that someone (apparently totally unknown) has made a harmonica partly out of glass, and that nobody has taken much notice of it? We really don't need to clutter up articles on notable subject with such un-notable information. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:41, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * While WP:N would indicate that the topic does not merit a separate article, lacking individual notability has nothing to do with the reasonableness of a merge, and acts thusly to inform readers.  SCHMIDT,  Michael Q. 03:44, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The barest extract. It is 'of note' though not notable per WP:N, that someone has made them out of glass. But I don't feel strongly enough to say more than that about it. Fiddle   Faddle  22:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge as suggested by User:FigureArtist snd User:Nwlaw63, as a verifiable topic that lacks notability for its own article. Reasonable to serve the project.  SCHMIDT,  Michael Q. 03:44, 6 August 2013 (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.