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. —
Tom Morris (
talk) 14:04, 9 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete No indication of wp:notability. Too narrow to be an article. North8000 (
talk) 17:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)reply
merge Of course it's too narrow to be a separate article--even if it could technically meet the GNG (there might well be sufficient reviews) . But that does not mean it should be deleted, just merged into an article with other Nikon lenses of the same type (and the reviews if found, can be used as references there). There;'s never any reason to completely delete the information on a significant product from a famous company. For article content, notability is irrelevant, just WP:V--and therefore there is no policy based reason for deletion. DGG (
talk ) 05:55, 2 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
WifioneMessage 11:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete No indicaiton of wp:notability. Too narrow to be an article, and the content is unenclyclopedic product details. North8000 (
talk) 12:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete Or merge to appropriate product list.
Nwlaw63 (
talk) 21:03, 2 February 2012 (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.