Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SMC532

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. Multiple guideline-based arguments in delete !votes trump sole unqualified keep !vote. --Kinu ^t/_c 07:14, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SMC532

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

Wikipedia is not a how to manual. No evidence that this is a notable product such that a valid article could be written, but even if it were, this is not the article that we would write about it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:34, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ok,i'll delete the Most details part make it more like an encyclopedic reference Aulyp (talk) 14:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Aulyp: Based on what sources? I haven't found any reliable sources to indicate that this is a notable product. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:50, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non notable module, reads like an advertisement. Deunanknute (talk) 15:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

source for SMC532:SEE, YOUTUBE have the VIDEO Aulyp (talk) 03:23, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me,how to write this Article adapt Wikipedia rules,Please give some tips，i'm a new in Wikipedia,and want to contribution something.Aulyp (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a product brochure. Even if this is notable, then we'd have to start from scratch. @Aulyp: See WP:Your first article, WP:42, and, as a reference, Pentium and MOS Technology 6502. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:35, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the Interpretation and guidance from WikiDan61,i would find some reliable sources for the SMC532. thanks agian

Aulyp (talk) 07:49, 26 January 2015 (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.