Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nokia 5510


 * 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. Hut 8.5 11:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Nokia 5510

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable cellular phone. This product isn't notable; it's just another incarnation of a common object with no discerning features, no sustaining influence on the market or design, and little longevity. Doesn't meet WP:PRODUCT. Article is unlikely to be repaired because of the lack of substantial sources for this product. Prod expired 2007-10-15 18:39, the article wasn't deleted, and the prod was contested at 19:03, 16 October 2007. Mikeblas 00:58, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The prod was removed by an admin considering it for deletion because it had expired, so there's nothing unusual about the timing. It does make a claim for notability &mdash; "The 5510 is unusual compared to most mobile phones, as it has an almost complete QWERTY keyboard, rather than the conventional telephone keypad" &mdash; and that kind of claim needs to be discussed at an AfD, so I agree with the removal of the prod. Here's an article about it at ZDnet, which supports the claim that its design was a unique feature at the time of its release. Another review at The Register, which again notes the unusual design. An Australian review which is unfavourable but again notes the unique design. I found these in the first 70 hits of around 1.5 million, so I'm sure there are more sources to be dug out. I usually say delete to the mobile phone articles, but this one does look like a good example of a notable case. Thomjakobsen 01:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. The linked "article" at zdnet is only 400 words, not counting the misplaced glossary of snowboarding terms in the piece. The capsule reviews are 150 words or less. Wikipedia requires substantial references to establish notability. -- Mikeblas 03:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Right, but that's the shortest of the articles I linked to. The second and third ones are much longer than that, and are "substantial" by any measure. Further down the list of results, you find this Google Books reference ("Product Concept Design"), which is a discussion of the 5510's role in Nokia's design history, together with a diagram, claiming that it was a key product because it paved the way for the N-Gage. And here, a national newspaper article on 2001 being a year of great innovation for phones, and the 5510 is the only model named as a prime example. These are at odds with the claims of "non-notable", "no discerning features", "no influence on the market and design" in the nomination. Thomjakobsen 14:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep --- notability can easily be proven. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  03:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete: Non notable object. The only notable cell phone I can think of is the iPhone.  Too bad admin didn't catch it right when the PROD expired. - Rjd0060 05:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Commment: WP:PRODUCT suggests that "the discussion of the company's products and services should be broken out from the company article in summary style." Summary style is a top-down approach. I would really appreciate if someone could expand Nokia into a good article, before iterating the technical data of every single device they have ever produced. --B. Wolterding 12:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Thomjakobsen, clearly notable. Tim Q. Wells 15:36, 20 October 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.