Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brontobyte (2nd nomination)

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. No need for the salt shaker quite yet but I'll keep an eye on it. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brontobyte

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

Delete without redirect, and WP:SALT A neologism with no significant coverage in reliable sources. Promotional coat rack article for a Polish company. Repeatedly recreated by probable WP:SPAs on behalf of the corporation (see User:Brontobajt & User:Brontobajt.pl). Cybercobra (talk) 22:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can find only this, and similarly passing/jocular usages in unreliable sources. It's not even clear whether the unit is well-defined or just a byte-equivalent of "kajillion". --Cybercobra (talk) 00:15, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete content. Either salt as suggested by Cybercobra, or redirect to Non-SI unit prefixes#Unofficial prefixes and protect (maybe temporary full protection then long-term semi-protection?). No significant coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:GNG so a separate article is not justified. There are, however, several mentions in reliable sources going back at least 20 years — 2nd hit on the above GBooks search is a 1991 edition of MacUser (which defines it as a mere 10⁹ megabytes = 1 petabyte, so it appears not to be well-defined). Qwfp (talk) 08:05, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without redirect Non-notable until defined by a standards organization. I know that that's a high bar, but it really isn't worth a mention until then. Dingo1729 (talk) 19:24, 15 March 2011 (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.