Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pepper (robot)

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 00:17, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pepper (robot)

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

Aside from a short mention in the znet article, doesn't seem to meet our GNG criteria. Suggest merging whatever small blurb here into the company's article (which is almost nothing). Shadowjams (talk) 04:33, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; er, the zdnet article is certainly not the only mention. A quick search revealed sources from Reuters, BBC, NBC News, CNN, CNET, PCMag, IEEE Spectrum, Computerworld, Gulf News, TechCrunch, and The Verge, just to name a few without including non-English sources. These are all dated around the same time due to the robot just being announced a few days ago (and presumably based off of the same announcement), but there's significant coverage to make it notable, and plenty more to include the current stub. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per SuperHamster. BBC, CNN and and PCMag on their own would be enough to convince me of notability. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:37, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Robotics-related deletion discussions. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:37, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:38, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Commercial ad for a product that does not yet exist. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:21, 11 June 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Keep per Cédric at Aldebaran. Beside the media coverage, the product does exist, as it's being used by Softbank in their shops [1]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep — It's only six-days-old and it's already got coverage by zdnet, The Verge, & Japan Times. One would expect, if it actually goes on sale sometime around Feb 2015, there will be substantially more coverage at that time. It leans a little bit towards promotional, but it also is of encyclopedic interest. Meanwhile, there already seems to be enough coverage to keep the stub per WP:BASIC. — Who R you? Talk 17:54, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - passes WP:GNG, and per WP:NTEMP. The notion of a merge can be discussed on an article talk page if warranted. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:54, 12 June 2014 (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.