- 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 00:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
AirDye
- AirDye ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Reads like something out of a brochure, with a sensationalist tone. The majority of sources are either press releases or blogs. A search revealed mostly press releases and blogs as well. Nothing reliable enough to show the subject's notability. Lugia2453 ( talk) 16:28, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
- Fully agree. This is a terrible-quality article on a topic for which there seems to be no high-quality source. Ariadacapo ( talk) 16:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
- Keep: Article is useful. Can be improved by deleting promotional content and adding reliable sources. Only multiple issue tag is required - Rameshnta909 ( talk) 19:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
- Delete: Clearly an ad. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a magazine. MiracleMat ( talk) 03:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey2010 • (talk) 15:22, 17 July 2014 (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.
- 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 00:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
AirDye
- AirDye ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Reads like something out of a brochure, with a sensationalist tone. The majority of sources are either press releases or blogs. A search revealed mostly press releases and blogs as well. Nothing reliable enough to show the subject's notability. Lugia2453 ( talk) 16:28, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
- Fully agree. This is a terrible-quality article on a topic for which there seems to be no high-quality source. Ariadacapo ( talk) 16:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
- Keep: Article is useful. Can be improved by deleting promotional content and adding reliable sources. Only multiple issue tag is required - Rameshnta909 ( talk) 19:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
- Delete: Clearly an ad. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a magazine. MiracleMat ( talk) 03:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey2010 • (talk) 15:22, 17 July 2014 (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.