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. Per consensus, non-notable knock off. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:46, 6 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IPed[edit]

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

Articles about counterfeit devices proceed every major Apple product release; none of it very sustained or significant. This is just another in a long line of dreadful knockoffs that had about three days of awareness before it was buried under a heap of other bad Chinese electronics. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 05:25, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete Non-notable counterfeit brand(s): possibly never receive attention more than satire of China's counterfeit market. Also objects to redirect to iPad as ((R from misspelling)). 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 07:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete: Agreed with above, it is a knockoff and irrelevant. _Truco ⁵⁰³ 07:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete as knockoff, Not even worth mentioning in the Ipad article, –Davey2010^Talk 02:05, 4 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[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.