Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiReader (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The result was withdrawn. I still don't really feel that this product is notable (perhaps it will become notable as a failure?), but there is a strong consensus to the contrary. JBsupreme (talk) 08:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiReader

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. This product was deleted once before upon the closure of an earlier AFD debate, and I don't believe its any more notable now than it was then. Reads as self promotional spam either way. Please send it back to the recycle bin. JBsupreme (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that's not correct. The earlier AFD was for something completely different -- Wikipedia:WikiReader, which was a wikis-to-print initiative that was the predecessor of Wikipedia:Books. This is a piece of hardware, developed by a completely different group. I'm not seeing the "self promotional spam" part, either; article was written by people unconnected with the project. Request withdrawal of AFD, based on faulty information. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 22:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you phoebe, as I am not an administrator I could not see that. JBsupreme (talk) 22:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin either... I just am familiar with both projects :) -- phoebe / (talk to me) 23:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (speedy?) It is getting a fair amount of media coverage today. Just check Google News. --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep there is no way the first afd referenced this product, as that was a 2006 debate and this device has just been announced. plus the news coverage is obvious notability riffic (talk) 22:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article is in very early stages, but google news shows 55 articles at the moment. Rror (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Currently on the front page of Slashdot and several other tech sites and attracting considerable interest, this was just officially announced on the OpenMoko mailing list today I believe. Seems to be getting coverage on every major web tech site. Ben Kidwell (talk) 22:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- We really should not create articles for every new product to hit Slashdot. "Just announced" suggests a certain distinct form of non-notability in my eyes. JBsupreme (talk) 22:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - To me, [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] and plenty more indicate that this device has already acquired a fair amount of notability. Ben Kidwell (talk) 23:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per coverage listed by User:Ben Kidwell. --Cybercobra (talk) 00:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 00:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.