Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Treo 650 (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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Speedy keep --Doc (?) 00:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Treo 650
I found a malformed VFD for this article that never seemed to have made it to the main VFD page, then got abandoned in the VFD/AFD switchover. This is no vote, as the original VFD had few non-sock/anon voters; this relist is just to honor the original nominator's intentions. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 22:36, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as an influential and popular smartphone, whose flaws made national news in the US. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 22:36, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep -- Nowhere do I see any reasoning to delete the article, a past nomination that failed for some reason is not in itself a reason to delete an article. Nor do I see anyone actually voting for delete in the past nomination, or this one, why should the article have to go through vfd again, and get yet another unanimous keep? --Mysidia (talk) 22:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The past nomination didn't fail; it received a handful of legitimate votes going both ways and a pile of sock/anon votes, and didn't get listed on the main VFD page in the first place. It was malformed, not failed. As for why I listed it, I didn't feel comfortable just removing the AFD notice without testing consensus, closing the screwed up VFD as keep, or sticking the month-old malformed VFD straight on the day's AFD page, so I posted this. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 22:56, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - Nevermind. I went through the history, and it turns out the person who added the original vfd tag didn't even make a VFD subpage, and all of the delete votes are invalid anyway as "Delete but combine with (another article)" or such. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 23:00, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. This is a perfectly valid article. --WyldStallionRyder 23:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep When a phone like the Norwegian Magcom is allowed an article, I fail to see why this one isn't! bjelleklang 23:10, 5 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.