Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nike Mercurial Vapor


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 06:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Nike Mercurial Vapor

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

1) Per WP:NOTADVERT this at the very least needs WP:TNT 2) Fails WP:GNG. After removing a bunch of unreliable sources there are only four left and the four that are left I'm still iffy about. I'm only on the fence with them because another editor found an editorial staff member on LinkedIn. The sources left mostly detail product releases and that is it. They do not provide in depth coverage of the product in and of itself. A google search does not uncover any additional WP:RS. Pure garbage. TarnishedPathtalk 06:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting, we need a Redirect to a target ARTICLE not a target Redirect. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:11, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Sports,  and Football. TarnishedPathtalk 06:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:13, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to a new article on Nike football boots or similar, which would be a notable general topic. GiantSnowman 10:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * It was an article - redirected - now restored. GiantSnowman 07:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete - I don't think it is impossible to have an article about a product line. For instance, a car model may clearly be notable for a page, but what makes it notable is significant coverage, independent of the subject in reliable secondary sources. From what I have been able to find, this is not the case here. The sourcing primarily leads back to advertising copy and product releases and lacks independence. The creation of a football boots stub seems like a bold move to provide a WP:ATD, but I don't believe that, at this stage, even the general subject has been shown to be notable. A redirect to Nike, Inc. would be more useful at this time, if anyone feels redirect is suitable. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:21, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * , can you sign your vote please. TarnishedPathtalk 09:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * done. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TNT. Not needed, Wikipedia is not an advertising platform. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:21, 25 September 2023 (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.