Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LG CU500


 * 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 Keep. Davewild 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

LG CU500

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is not a Lucky Goldstar catalog. This product is not notable; too few substantial references other than reviews are available to support writing a sustainable encyclopedia article. Mikeblas (talk) 17:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - The article itself isn't too bad, and there a few (maybe stretching it a bit) sources by which we could verify claims. I understand that there is few too many substantial references, but (never let be the one to do it) there are 1,900,000 hits for the search of this article. Keep? &mdash; Rudget contributions 17:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Google hits don't establish notability. The reason why is demonstrated by this phone itself; the vast majority of hits are either commercial links for the sale or rental of the phone, or capsule reviews. Both include little more than PR material. While Google might demonstrate popularity, or high-availability in a commercial market, it doesn't demonstrate notability. -- Mikeblas (talk) 02:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hence why I said - "never let me be the one to do it". I know "g-hits" doesn't establish notability, but it does usually indicate popularity and therefore a wide range of sources are available, and then it is reliable sourced. But currently, the article doesn't have them. &mdash; Rudget contributions 11:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep&mdash;sufficient references available; also of interest for being one of the first HSDPA phones available in the US market. Spacepotato (talk) 09:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Sufficient references, article needs to be rewritten, but worth keeping. -- ZeWrestler  Talk 23:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Tim Q. Wells 02:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep agree as notable as any other phone --EJF 19:18, 3 December 2007 (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.