Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samsung SGH-F210 (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Sources support WP:GNG and WP:PRODUCT. (non-admin closure) I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 08:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Samsung SGH-F210
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Removed PROD due to previous AFD. PROD reason was "no third-party sources, notability not demonstrated in any way" Article is essentially unchanged since previous afd. Illia Connell (talk) 05:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * What we really need to do is create a List of Samsung phones and then merge/redirect everything in Samsung phones to it. None of them will be independently notable enough for a separate article but all of them ought to have coverage at the list level.  Would anyone object if I co-nominated all the bluelinks in Samsung phones?— S Marshall  T/C 08:23, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Lots of these articles are stubs that are unlikely to be further expanded, but not all phones in Samsung phones are stubs -- all the latest Nexus phones for example. A List of Samsung phones would be useful, but perhaps AfDs for the individual stubs should be tackled as they are noticed. I doubt that anyone is going to have time or inclination to go through them all at once to determine notability. As an aside, I would remove all the redlinks from Samsung phones as some of these older models are unlikely to ever have articles that are much more than the name of the phone, but that's for another discussion. Illia Connell (talk) 09:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd say we should do the same as we have with List of HTC phones with links to phones worth articles (e.g. most of the i series have respectable articles) and just list entries otherwise. Let's not go delete-happy until we get existing the data (and especially pictures) in the stubs transitioned to the list or it'll be a lot more annoying to gather that info back up.  Grandmartin11 (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Reviewed and featured on several well-known tech review sites. Notable. (Most of the reviews are from British sites, and it doesn't seem to have much American coverage, but not all phones are released in all markets.) --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:54, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Colapeninsula. Those sources look promising. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 20:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 21:08, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep as per the rationale of Colapeninsula. The article for this gadget should be significantly expanded, however. Backtable Speak to meconcerning my deeds. 07:52, 30 August 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.