Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trongs


 * 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. ffm is now L Faraone  22:32, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Trongs

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

This article is a prime example of commercial spam, it was created by a SPA account and is maintained by two others. Additionally, it had an interwiki page that was deleted as spam. Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 19:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I found this Chicago Tribune article. If the Chicago Tribune things Trongs are worth writing about, then they're notable. – Eastmain (talk) 20:30, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - after a look into this, the Trib link is not to an article but a photo gallery of items found at a food products convention. The article isn't about the product, but the convention. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 00:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The article links to two Chicago Tribune articles, at least one of which is specifically about trongs, as well as a PRI interview on the subject. Sounds like notability to me. --MelanieN (talk) 03:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
 * Comment - Again, the provided sources are not about the product, they are not valid sources. They do not meet the standards of WP:Note.
 * Keep It has coverage in at least two notable publications. Official website also has links that might cover them in combination with H1N1. - Mgm|(talk) 13:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Don't do it.If it's deleted,should the chinese version also be deleted?--俠刀行 (talk) 11:11, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete wikipedia is not for documenting every wacky garage invention. nn, even with the provided sources. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
 * 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.