| Revision as of 20:40, 10 July 2006 editRal315 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,640 edits →[]: - Keep.← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:27, 11 July 2006 edit undoJJay (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,366 edits →[]Next edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| *** That's the top 1,000 unique hits that Google will show. I see in English. ] (]) 20:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC) | *** That's the top 1,000 unique hits that Google will show. I see in English. ] (]) 20:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Keep''', but '''re-write''' so as to reduce the advertising in it. ] (]) 20:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC) | * '''Keep''', but '''re-write''' so as to reduce the advertising in it. ] (]) 20:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Keep'''. Obvious growing trend. Many news hits from major publications. --] 01:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:27, 11 July 2006
Freebord
This article was prodded and deleted but there was an objection to the prod at the talk page and later at deletion review. Procedural nomination, no recommendation from me. Haukur 19:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Strong keep, the product has been featured in many, many US and international media magazines, with PDFs of the articles available at their website. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, looks notable to me. Emc² (CONTACT ME) 19:43, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Also has articles in French and German, obviously notable. tmopkisn 19:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Strong keep, notable. -- Ravn 21:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Google hits all over the place. JDoorjam Talk 01:38, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- From the article: All freebords are currently being manufactured by a single company, Freebord manufacturing Inc.
This is a de facto advertisement for that company, eh? I see zero hits on google news, and in fact very few google hits full stop, less than 500 unique. The pdfs linked from the home page (the ones I looked I, I admin I couldn't be arsed to check them all, they are huge downloads) were advertorials. This should be moved to Freebord manufacturing Inc and then deleted as failing to satisfy the guideline for inclusion of businesses. That guideline is quite clear on the requirement for "multiple non-trivial published works" and further states that "stories that do not credit a reporter or a news service may be treated as press releases." The article totally lacks third party sources and based upon my google-trawling they may be difficult to find if we exclude "press releases" per the guideline. Does there in fact exist multiple independant sources that heartily endorse this product and/or service? - brenneman 06:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)- I see the sources problem - I think it can be fixed, even though this kind of sports events are not commonly mentioned in mainstream media - hence the number of advertorialoid reviews in trend sport magazines. The article is however not about the company, but the sport, and should be treated as such. Snakeboards have a similar history - a single company holding a patent. I therefore do not understand the aforementioned sentence or the article as an advertisement for the company. -- Ravn 10:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm... The way I thought it worked is that Google takes the 500 top hits and displays the unique ones among those (430 or something, in this case). So you never see more than 500 Google hits no matter what you do. Haukur 18:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- That's the top 1,000 unique hits that Google will show. I see 568 unique hits in English. Ral315 (talk) 20:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, but re-write so as to reduce the advertising in it. Ral315 (talk) 20:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Obvious growing trend. Many news hits from major publications. --JJay 01:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)