Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motorola i870


 * 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 Snowball kept. This article has a snowball's chance in hell of getting deleted. Also, Will381796 argues the presence of other similar articles acts as a precedent. Computerjoe 's talk 15:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC) Scratched out because this user had participated in the conversation and decided to keep it. I'll take the close on this one. SynergeticMaggot 16:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Motorola i870
The subject of the article is non-notable. The article makes no claim as to the particular notability of this model of telephone. Many models of telephones are released every year, and a mere list of features and specifications does not mean the subject is sufficient for inclusion &mdash;ptk✰fgs 01:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Very Strong Keep&mdash;there's always room for improvement for the article, and I say that you should keep it instead of delete it. Unless the phone changes are minor, I would keep as there are noticeable changes for the i870 to deserve an article. &mdash; Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 01:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Very Strong Keep In addition to above, articles are present for many other motorola cell phones. There appears to be a precedent for inclusion.  will381796 01:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment you see a "precedent for inclusion". I look at the same filth and I just see a whole lot more AFD's ahead of me. We have to treat them one at a time. &mdash;ptk✰fgs 01:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep —  Article is well written, explains why the phone is unique, and the subject of the article seems notable to me and has plenty of ghits. 209,000 Dionyseus 01:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Do we need a separate article for every single model of mobile telephone? Motorola International 3200 is notable because, as the article states, it was "the first digital mobile telephone". This model appears to just be another clamshell unit with Windows Mobile. Was it the first in some particular class? Did it introduce some revolutionary new technology? No, it's just a variation on its predecessors, with slightly better battery life, a slightly faster processor, slightly more storage, etc.
 * Of course there are google hits for models of phones. There are google hits for every line of code in the Linux kernel. Why is this model more significant than all others? Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of phone specs. &mdash;ptk✰fgs 01:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia Dionyseus 01:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No, we're not running out of paper. But damn, we sure are blowing through our credibility like there ain't no tomorrow. &mdash;ptk✰fgs 01:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This product isn't notable enough to deserve an article. Its features are tentative and evolutionary and not revolutionary. A crummy article about a non-notable phone could be edited and improved, but then we'd just have good artilce on a crummy phone and some editors who should've spent their time on something more important. -- Mikeblas 02:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - there's no reason why not —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richardcavell (talk • contribs).
 * Keep&mdash;But this opens the door for a lot of similar technical material. That said, it is well enough written that I'm open to letting the autor make a broader case for such material. Afterall, the virtue of Wikipedia is that it bravely goes where the Encyclopædia Britannica fears to tread. And if we have editors willing to contribute such material, why not go there? Williamborg (Bill) 04:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per precedent. --דניאל ~ Danielrocks123 talk  contribs   Email 05:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Wikipedia is not limited like a paper encyclopedia, as such the distinct products (as opposed to variations upon these) of major companies are a great inclusion. For internationally marketed products, it should be possible to aquire english-language reviews from trade/consumer magazines, giving WP:V and WP:RS. The product lines of a major company are themselves notable, too. LinaMishima 12:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Question - Is there somewhere some of this information can be merged to? I've seen that been done with specific computer models in the past.  Wickethewok 13:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia is not paper. --Arnzy (whats up?)  14:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above and the presence of a GFDL photo Computerjoe 's talk 15:04, 21 August 2006 (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.