Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linux (washing powder)
no notability established other than being called Linux SYSS Mouse 22:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep It is a real product, by a real company, Rösch which even though it is a stub, does have some claim to notability, at least on the face of it. I suspect the problem is that they're primarily engaged in business outside the English speaking world. Mister.Manticore 23:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia is not a catalog of products. No particular notability for this brand has been established nor even asserted. No reliable sources have been cited. There are lots of ghits, but eliminate Wikipedia mirrors and company sites, etc., and one is left with bloggers and chat rooms discussing the curiosity of the name. Robert A.West (Talk) 23:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete not notable. Wikipedia is not a collection of indescriminate information. Anomo 05:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Keep, the article's has been around since 2004 and is mentioned on WP:UA. oTHErONE (Contribs)Strong delete, monkey rollerskates. 15:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)- Neither of which is a legitimate keep argument. Wikipedia is inconsistent and may temporarily tolerate what it does not condone, which means that deleteworthy articles can exist for some time. Internal links and commentary do not notability make. Robert A.West (Talk) 12:43, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Why the hell do you care? You've already stated your reasons for deletion. oTHErONE (Contribs) 13:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- This is not a vote, it is a discussion. It is perfectly proper and beneficial to comment about the reasons others give either to keep or to delete an article. Sometimes minds are even changed by the process. Robert A.West (Talk) 14:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Good point. oTHErONE (Contribs) 15:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- This is not a vote, it is a discussion. It is perfectly proper and beneficial to comment about the reasons others give either to keep or to delete an article. Sometimes minds are even changed by the process. Robert A.West (Talk) 14:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Why the hell do you care? You've already stated your reasons for deletion. oTHErONE (Contribs) 13:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Neither of which is a legitimate keep argument. Wikipedia is inconsistent and may temporarily tolerate what it does not condone, which means that deleteworthy articles can exist for some time. Internal links and commentary do not notability make. Robert A.West (Talk) 12:43, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment by the way, I also think a merge to Rösch would be appropriate to consider. Mister.Manticore 16:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep- very reasonable to keep in Linux_(disambiguation). Tonytypoon 01:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - notability is a weird thing. A non-notable person or thing suddenly becomes notable because of a halo effect of another person or thing. I don't know if this powder came out before or after Linux became popular but when I drive through Switzerland next I'm gonna get some. I suspect it should be easier to install now than previous versions of powder, use less water, and complete the task of washing my clothes faster (oops sorry my cognitive bias showing). Strangely enough the company also has mäc oxi [1] (an illusion to Mac OS I guess ?) but no Windows OS unless you could construe "Dodomat" [2] to be the equivalent. Like they say Switzerland is fully of clocks and cheese with holes in it; just like my reason to keep. Ttiotsw 10:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, not even close to notable. CRGreathouse (t | c) 10:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)