Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nitrogen generator
- 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 keep. — Aitias // discussion 01:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Nitrogen generator (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Semi-blatant spam. Notice the article creator was Grasys, which is also mentioned in the link at the end of the article. Also notice that much of the copy and pictures comes from Grasys promotional materials - see [1]. Mr. Vernon (talk) 08:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and tag for cleanup. In contrast to the oxygen plants above, nitrogen generators are common equipment produced by a wide variety of companies, including many that use the adsorption technique described here. If Grasys have licensed us their pictures and text to use under GFDL, as it appears, that gives us a good head start on producing a useful article about this common industrial equipment. JulesH (talk) 09:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and cleanup per JulesH. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 09:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Grasys Hi. Of course, i can licensed all pictures and text. I have the same license in Russia because i need more time for translations. Where i can send text of license? GRASYS
- Keep. Besides giving grasys.com as the sole reference, there are no other problems with the article. Xasodfuih (talk) 10:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep A piece of equipment that should be here. I've added another commercial link, and a non-commercial one. There are loads more suppliers if anyone wants to add a few... Peridon (talk) 10:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Nononono we should diversify the references, but remove all suppliers from the external links because they end up spam magnets. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 11:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Go ahead, then... Peridon (talk) 14:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Seems to me that whatever commercial conflicts of interest might exist, machines for making nitrogen are nevertheless a worthy topic, and any problems that come from spam insertion or excessive featuring of the machines of any one supplier can be dealt with by editing. And if the people at Grasys wish to dedicate their own photos under the GFDL, there's no reason to reject them. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep As per AfD of Oxygen plant. We should not be punishing SMEs if they produce valid non-POV and non-SPAM content. §FreeRangeFrog 20:06, 3 February 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.