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 no consensus; nothing was really achieved as a result, and I'm not relisting this for a third time as that would be purely silly. - Daniel.Bryant 10:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Levinson ML-3[edit]

This is a discontinued piece of audio equipment, referenced only to a site which describes equipment from that manufacturer. Could not find independent writeups of it in mainstreem publications, other than blogs and fan websites devoted to high end audio equipment. Appears to fail WP:RS and WP:N. Inkpaduta 19:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related page for the same reasons:[reply]

There is a photograph of the amplifier - it is an actual product. It is also discontinued, which means that keeping it here doesn't serve to benefit the company - only historical preservation of knowledge of the product. The information seems objective. Why delete it? --I am nitrogen 06:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Photographs exist of a great many things that are not notable ebough for Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia's notability policy WP:N and reliable source policy WP:RS require that something has been the subject of multiple nontrivial coverage in independent and reliable sources. The fansite listing equipment made by the company is neither of those. "IT IS HARMLESS" is not a valid reason for keeping an article about a piece of audio eequipment if it was not notable in its time. Perhaps someone can dig up a couple of reviews in an audio magazines from the days when it was for sale. That would help. Otherwise the articlew should be deleted. Inkpaduta 15:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Quarl ^(talk) 05:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keep Although not currently produced, it is a very famous high-end amplifier, though predating the Web.DGG 03:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A famous piece of audio equipment doubtless has been the subject of multiple articles in independent, reliable and verifiable sources. If someone would add two or three such, as nominator I would be happy to keep the article. Right now it does not have such sources. It appears to have been extremely high priced equipment sold to audiophiles, so somewhere in an audiophile magazine there should have been articles. Saying "it is famous" does not satisfy WP:N {[WP:V]] or WP:RS. Inkpaduta 18:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, —Doug Bell ^talk 13:28, 18 February 2007 (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.