Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kapok Guitar


 * 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. The sourcing issue has not been adequately resolved, even though Epeefleche indicates a possible source. If the article can be rewritten in a manner which satisfies the criteria of WP:N and WP:RS, the consensus on whether this brand of guitars is notable may be different. Sjakkalle (Check!)  13:08, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Kapok Guitar

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No third-party reliable source indicating notability. Original article created in 2006 was about a Malaysian guitar brand and noted that the term had also become a genericized trademark. Recently, the original article was overwritten and changed to be refer to a Chinese guitar brand. I can't find any third-party evidence of the notability of either brands, only that the Chinese brand currently exists as a division of Pearl River (company). Scattered forum postings support the genericized trademark claim, but that's about it. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:55, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 13:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 13:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 13:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete orphaned article on an unremarkable company. Cant add much to nominators sleuthing which hasnt found much to indicate this company might meet WP:GNG RadioFan (talk) 22:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a famous Guitar brand in china has more than fifty years' guitar manufacture experience. there is a summary here. http://www.kapokguitars.com.cn/en/about.asp User:Slyhans (talk) 3:00, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment if it is a famous as you claim, you should be able to sufficiently reference it to meet notabilty guidelines.--RadioFan (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Comment. There seems to be a reference in one book that pops up in a google book search, but I can't get to it to assess what it says.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comement one mention in a single book does not "significant coverage" make.--RadioFan (talk) 01:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Nor have I voted keep.  Significant mention in multiple books would constitute significant coverage, so I was just leaving a comment as to what I have found (which is more than people previously indicated).  If the book is a RS, and the mention surpasses the triviality threshold, this could be one element moving (though not sufficient in itself) towards meeting the cat 1 notability standard.  Perhaps someone else has access.  That's all I'm saying ... Fair enough?--Epeefleche (talk) 02:14, 28 October 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.