Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikon D3000


 * 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. JForget 23:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Nikon D3000

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Just another camera, nothing special about it, thus fails WP:N. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It does NOT fail the general notability guideline. Raysonho (talk) 23:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. We've got articles about most other camera models. There's clearly plenty of press coverage. Pburka (talk) 23:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep: Bundles of articles/reviews for this product on Gsearch. Does not fail WP:N in any sense as far as I can tell. Metty (talk) 01:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep: Probably a Headbomb damaged his head. THINK. Wispanow (talk) 02:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please provide a rationale focusing on the article itself; criticizing the nominator does little good. –'''[[User:Juliancolton|Juliancolton ]]''' &#124; Talk 18:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please no personal attacks - Ret.Prof (talk) 20:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: I am also disappointed because someone did not read WP:N carefully YET used it as the reason for article deletion. It really causes extra work for other editors. Raysonho (talk) 02:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Does not fail WP:N at all Admrboltz (talk) 13:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If it doesn't fail notability, then it should be easy to add sources. Right now this is nothing more than vanity page. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics}
 * If you now say that it is unreferenced, then you have used the wrong template and used the wrong reasoning for nominating the article for deletion. A simple google search will give you lots of hits for D3000. So much for the Barnstars. Raysonho (talk) 16:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: Headbomb made a mistake.Ret.Prof (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Useful page about a new product without much available information on the web.scott.medling (talk) 00:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep: More sources will become available as time goes on, as this is a relatively new camera. Besides, there are articles for many other cameras. Black Sabre (talk) 13:17, 16 September 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.