Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bashan 125R (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 no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bashan 125R

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

In the first AfD, I said "Non-notable product. No independent sourcing to back up any of the claims in the article." Although some sources have been added, the root problems remain. The only independent source is the China Business Review story, but it discusses business in Chongqing and makes only a passing reference to Bashan. The remaining sources are non-independent, as they're websites of the manufacturer, importer, or resellers. Accordingly, the product does not appear to have received significant coverage in reliable sources—and fails the general notability guidelines. I had tagged it for speedy deletion under criterion G4, but that's been turned down, so I'm opening a second AfD discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. — ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ ② 23:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that this needs to be deleted. Clearly it's all marketing, and all of that material needs to be removed, but I don't agree that it is without any notability. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ (talk) 07:44, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 24 January 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.