Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Key Largo (boat)

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. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Key Largo (boat)

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

Fails to demonstrate notability, the page is for all intents and purposes empty and is a dead end with no links to any other pages & possibly WP:NOTCATALOG Gbawden (talk) 07:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:06, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:06, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep The company, sessa marine, is a notable yacht builder and the model mentioned comes up easily in a google search. If article can be expanded upon and notable sources are cited. It will qualify.Righteousskills (talk) 23:46, 26 October 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, Jenks24 (talk) 11:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

keep Not a lot, but I was able to find a review from an American magazine and several references in Italian. It might make more sense to have an article on the manufacturer and merge this to that. Mangoe (talk) 15:59, 2 November 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, MBisanz ^talk 00:30, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable product stub, article makes no indication of why it is notable. The only mention of this product I can find is on the manufacturers website. --neon white talk 13:13, 10 November 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, —Theo polisme 00:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As a product of a company that doesn't even rate a standalone article on Wikipedia. If it did, I'd go for a redirect. §FreeRangeFrog 20:25, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice toward a mention in the company's article if it can be shown they meet WP:GNG. As far as this product on its own goes, I don't see any notability. --Kinu ^t/_c 20:09, 18 November 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.