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. Titoxd^(?!?) 02:22, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Casio WK-3000 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Just a list of specifications, no indication of notability. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 17:10, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this article is pretty useless. I don't mind it being deleted.

I made it a long time ago, not entirely sure what I was thinking at the time.

Tundra010 (talk) 21:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Questionable for its own article. SwisterTwister talk 22:59, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It is possible that it is notable, if there are major reviews,but it would be easy enough to reconstruct it if there are DGG ( talk ) 02:13, 4 February 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.