Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electrical swivel connector

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. - Mailer Diablo 17:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Electrical swivel connector

This is a new product (by a company called OSHA) that was awarded a patent (US #6,190,180). After Waikikisurf (talk · contribs) created this page (and created links for it on other pages), Witty lama (talk · contribs) tagged it as a speedy for spam. Mikkalai (talk · contribs) removed the CSD notice, explaining on the talkpage that the product was notable because it has been patented. However, the principle is not novel and is indeed the basis for many electric motors. I don't think every product with a patent should have a page, and certainly if it is only just being introduced (and the manufacturer makes the connector on order). Delete. JFW | T@lk 19:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Patents are a dime a dozen, and hardly confer notability. Where are the references telling us how important this product is? If it's not verifiable, it's not a Wikipedia page. MarkBul 20:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in absence of independent 3rd party sources - patents are not hard to come by, and in any event are primary sources so don't confer notability. The tone of the article is on the spammy side as well. Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 20:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletions. —Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 20:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. All it needs is NPOV cleanup and some upgraiding by editors. M.V.E.i. 20:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment How does one upgrade it with no sources? And yes, I did look Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 21:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless either 6,190,179 other articles on patented devices establish a precedent, or WP:N changes significantly, or independent verification of notability comes to light. For example, is any notable company licensing this technology? That should be the benchmark for any notability claim based on a patent. Sheffield Steel^talkers_stalkers 21:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I've searched quite hard for sources on the web. All I can find is directories of some kind, patent sites and the like. There are lots of sources for swivel connectors in general, but usually for water, gas or telecoms equipment it would seem - nothing for this particular product - though it looks very useful. Obviously I will change my recommendation if a third-party reliable source can be found. TreeKittens 22:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per earlier commentators, the existence of a patent does not confer notability; being all that is required is that the device be "non-obvious" and "useful". The article makes no assertion of significance for this device, including even the patent. — BillC ^talk 23:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It doesn't even have to be particularly useful - you can get a patent for a self-congratulatory pat on the back apparatus. Or better still, this one Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 16:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ordering mine today! --TreeKittens 22:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Being neat is not being notable. If this is an effective product expect it to be touted in all the DIY magazines in the next year. --Dhartung | Talk 04:31, 12 September 2007 (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.