Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Q-Bot (Legoland)


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Q-Bot (Legoland)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This article describes one specific implementation of a product offered by Lo-Q, that used by Legoland Windsor. The product, Q-Bot, is discussed in sufficient depth in the Lo-Q article, and this particular implementation is discussed in the Legoland Windsor article. This article adds little other than tourist-guide-like information, and is completely unsourced. In the past I'd have CSD'd it, but I'm a bit out of touch with the current criteria, so would prefer the input of others. Talk Islander 00:07, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - Reads like an ad. This could be briefly covered by a footnote at the Legoland page. Jrcrin001 (talk) 00:41, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Information is accurate, just unsourced. Perhaps inclusion of pictures and sources would make article more official. ThemeparkGC editted article to become more factual. Article does explore versions of the product/rides/ and saves LLW page from excessive focus on Q-Bot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glitterbug123 (talk • contribs) 10:06, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - The wikification I performed to the article did not make it more factual. Themeparkgc   Talk  22:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:55, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - per those above. The article could easily be summarised in the Legoland Windsor's section on the device. I'll look at doing that in the next day or so . Themeparkgc   Talk  22:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - for those that are interested, I added a short summary of the article to the Legoland article and tried to minimise on the marketing speak. Themeparkgc   Talk  01:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - The summary Themeparkgq has added is sufficient. The article is unsourced and shows no hint of notability. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 20:06, 22 September 2012 (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.