Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barracuda atomic

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. Cirt (talk) 17:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barracuda atomic

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

I am nominating this as I have attempted a CSD in the past, but have been told this article is ineligible for a speedy delete, even for a stub article that does not indicates why this bicycle is notable.

Nominating this as individual bicycles are rarely notable unless for some reason, such as retrospective culture or have won a major sporting event, which in that case are highly likely to be custom bikes. In this case of this bicycle is none of these as when have a cheap full suspension bicycle ever became notable. Donnie Park (talk) 20:25, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete I see no particular evidence of notability myself. I removed the speedy tags because this was not without context, and does not fit the quite narrow confines of WP:CSD#A7. Therefore it should have wider community consensus for deletion. I don't quite agree with "when have a cheap full suspension bicycle ever became notable" -- "Schwinn" is sufficient answer. But that is perhaps covered under "retrospective culture" and is surely a somewhat exceptional case. Unless sources indicate some particular notability for this bike (and there might be printed sources not on the web for all i know) it should probably be deleted. DES ^(talk) 20:40, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete I have also been unable to find that the article has had significant coverage outside of advertising or buyer's opinions on the cycle. No mention of anything exceptional that distinguishes it from other bikes. At this time does assert notability. Calmer Waters 02:23, 30 December 2009 (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.