Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ladyfly


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 02:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Ladyfly

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable invention. Article cites 11 references, 9 of which were written by the leader of the project, Professor Alberto Rovetta. The 10th is a report written in collaboration with Rovetta. The 11th, a conference in which Rovetta was a speaker (the reference is only used to verify the dimensions of the robot). A Google News Search and a Google News Archive Search return no result. The only claim of independent and reliable coverage is of a CCTV report that simply showed "the robot in motion for several minutes" and then cites references that have nothing to do with CCTV. If I had to guess, it's a self-published piece. Ol Yeller Talktome 20:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable due to a lack of third-party sources. - SudoGhost (talk) 00:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note - The author of the article has added another reference from the NYT. The article does not mention Ladyfly by name (is not significant coverage of the subject) so in my opinion, the notability of the subject has not changed.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 14:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, no significant third-party coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. -- Kinu t /c  18:54, 22 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.