Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Limit lock

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Limit lock

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

A short new article on the invention of, "a better mousetrap".

Torque limiting and lock washers are obviously important and notable engineering topics. The "Limit lock" design claims to be a new one, solving a real problem. There are adequate background sources on the problem.

There is nothing here on the Limit lock design itself. There is only one link, to their own website - which says nothing either.

This article fails on two grounds: it has no encyclopedic content, it explains nothing. Secondly it is devoid of independent sources to verify that this device exists and works.

It was tagged for notability and as an advert, but they were removed by the article creator, without comment. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Weak Keep And Move to Torque Limiting Washer. I find there is encyclopedic content. I have always considered myself mechanically inclined and never knew there was such a device until reading this article. However, the current article is too much an advertisement and too closely associated with this company. I would like to see a neutrally written article on the concept. Can't tell what is in the listed refs since most aren't linked. For now, gut the advertising and leave a stub at the new name. MB 05:35, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree A general torque limiting washer article would be nice. Junkyardsparkle (talk) 07:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So what you mean is, create a new unsourced article on a topic that we don't even know it exists, under a name created by WP, and is only offered by one maker?

If you can produce some indication that "torque limiting washers" are a thing, then this would be a good change. I agree that a generic article beats a product article. But do they even exist? Can we WP:Verify that they exist?

Note that torque limiting couplings have been around for years [1] [2]. But they slip when the limit torque is reached, this one claims to lock instead. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:56, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Besides the company website and the youtube video, I can't find anything else. The Huffington Post item may be unreliable since there is no trace of it. The other refs in the article are all 10+ years old so they can't actually discuss this new product by this new company. So changing vote to Delete since nothing verified. MB 00:51, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, too bad about that, was hoping they were a thing, somehow, even if not a very successful thing... --Junkyardsparkle (talk) 04:07, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Purely promotional content on a single vendor's product and product name without any indications of notability. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 12:52, 18 November 2016 (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.