Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solar cable


 * 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. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:57, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Solar cable

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article has been created by an account whose sole purpose seems to be to add external links to pages from Eland Cables. The article is a minimal stub with no real content, except for the final sentence which makes the ridiculous claim that cables generate green electric power. The cable is a single core insulated sheathed cable: there is nothing particular special about it and the intersection with solar power is not demonstrated to be a notable topic.

Delete as nom Spinning  Spark  20:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  —  Meph talk 21:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy delete this is an ad.Yotemordis (talk) 23:05, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Note: blocked as a sock puppet. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 14:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Improve I can expand the article with more references. I've deleted the last sentence. Eleanor1975 (talk) 10:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Eleanor1975Eleanor1975 (talk) 10:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete spam, no reliable sources showing that there is a notable and distinct entity termed "solar cable" --Pontificalibus (talk) 22:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete thought was helping. Clearly wasn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eleanor1975 (talk • contribs) 09:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per G7; user above is the article creator and only contributor of substantive content. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 20:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Improved and can be improved further. It's my opinion that the deletion tag be removed. Cheers Suraj  T  11:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Improved by Suraj and I agree this has been proven a notable topic and deletion tag should be removed. Eleanor1975 (talk) 13:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Eleanor1975Eleanor1975 (talk) 13:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I have to say that if the article when first posted was in the state it is in now I would not have nominated it for deletion. I have now struck my delete.  It still has a lot of problems, especially the instructional tone (too many "should"s) but this can mostly be fixed by copyediting.  Spinning  Spark  17:21, 20 June 2011 (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.