The result was keep. consensus seems clear after the relisting;i have no personal opinion. DGG ( talk ) 04:43, 19 April 2012 (UTC) reply
Article Fails WP:GNG and appears to have no hope of improvement Lucia Black ( talk) 23:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I'm sorry, but the "proof" provided was over retail information. Which does not prove notability. Lucia Black ( talk) 05:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC) reply
what info is that? No development. No reception and even one review wont save it. It has to be information backed up through third party such as reception. Premise is mainly making it and thatg doesnt require sourcing. Lucia Black ( talk) 06:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. consensus seems clear after the relisting;i have no personal opinion. DGG ( talk ) 04:43, 19 April 2012 (UTC) reply
Article Fails WP:GNG and appears to have no hope of improvement Lucia Black ( talk) 23:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I'm sorry, but the "proof" provided was over retail information. Which does not prove notability. Lucia Black ( talk) 05:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC) reply
what info is that? No development. No reception and even one review wont save it. It has to be information backed up through third party such as reception. Premise is mainly making it and thatg doesnt require sourcing. Lucia Black ( talk) 06:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC) reply