Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gyp-Crete


 * 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   Move to Gypsum concrete. — Jake   Wartenberg  19:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Gyp-Crete

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Product advertisement Sandcherry (talk) 17:14, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Keep The article is hardly an advertisement. In addition, Gyp-Crete is an industry standard and unique construction material, of which there is no commonly used generic alternative term. "Gyp-Crete" is the term used. --Gebl Gebl Gebl (talk) 01:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Keep. Gyp-Crete has become an industry term for any gypsum concrete, not just the trademarked product. Industry professionals search for the term "gyp-crete" when they are looking for information on gypsum concrete. Content was added to the article to note this information. Nlghills (talk) 16:31, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * agreed. Gyp-Crete is the accepted, and honestly the only, term for this product type ... no matter what the actual manufacturer is. To be clear, nobody in the construction industry ever uses the term 'gypsum concrete'. --Gebl Gebl Gebl (talk) 01:47, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

 Keep  Nlghills's revison makes this less of a product advertisement for Maxxon's Gyp-Crete and more of a generic article about gyp-crete (gypsum concete). Removing the sentence "Gyp-Crete is installed only by companies approved by Maxxon Corporation" is suggested as gyp-crete is installed by others.Sandcherry (talk) 23:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: This AfD was malformed and never properly listed. Even though the nomination is withdrawn and the AfD technically closable per WP:SK, I feel that a few days of proper discussion before closing may be beneficial, hence the relist. Please consider this the first week of discussion for relisting purposes. Tim Song (talk) 00:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Delete  per the lack of reliable sources. While the editors above have determined that they can purge the article of promotion, they have been unable to prove its notability. I have done several searches for sources but have been unable to uncover anything to establish this product's notability. The company that created this product, Maxxon Corporation, does not have a Wikipedia article; the company does not appear to be notable: the articles on Google News Archive are either press releases or passing mentions. Thus, a merge cannot be performed, so this article should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 05:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've got experience working in the construction industry going back more than 20 years and I can tell you that it is more than "notable". This type of product is frequently used in multi-story multiple family dwellings. I have no connection whatsoever to the manufacturer of this product and have no particular axe to grind but deleting this article makes about as much sense as deleting the articles on caulk or duct tape. --Gebl Gebl Gebl (talk) 18:03, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If you can provide reliable sources for Gyp-Crete, I will withdraw my delete vote. My searches above have not returned any significant results. Cunard (talk) 21:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You did a couple of google news searches. Is google really the arbiter of all things "notable?" Please. --Gebl Gebl Gebl (talk) 22:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Google is not, but it is a good indicator of what is notable. This topic is not an obscure one or a non-English one, so there should be sources if it is notable. Cunard (talk) 01:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Changed to keep and rename to gypsum concrete per the multiple, nontrivial sources found by Whpq. Notability is fully established. Cunard (talk) 20:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Either as an industry term or a  trademarked product, the lack of reliable sources is evident. Rirunmot (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep  Has become an industry term. - Ret.Prof (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename to gypsum concrete and describe the material independent of the product/brand. Articles such as  and  refer to it by material name rather than by a brand name.  As well, building codes all refer to the material in that way.  -- Whpq (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding those sources! Cunard (talk) 20:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Since this approach makes more sense to me, I change my vote from Keep to Rename to gypsum concrete. However, I see nothing wrong with adding a statement like "Gypcrete is an industry term for gypsum concrete and also a trademark (Gyp-Crete TM) of Maxxon Corporation" provided a reliable source documenting gypcrete as an industry term is cited.Sandcherry (talk) 02:44, 19 September 2009 (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.