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. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vega machine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Barely/non-notable fringe concept. POV and source problems for at least eighteen months; it is evident no work at all has gone into fixing it. Sceptre ^(talk) 15:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I started working on this yesterday because it is in the oldest monthly category for POV problems. I don't have a strong opinion on if this qualifies as notable or not. But it is a little annoying to read the nomination claims "no work at all has gone into fixing it" when my start at fixing it presumptively is what brought up on the nominators watchlist or put it in their path in during RC patrol. I am not going to spend any effort on this while it is up for deletion, but if it survives it will not have POV problems within a week (at least as long as no one starts reverting my efforts)--BirgitteSB 03:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep obviously, work needs to be done on this low quality article. But there's no deadline. I point out that "barely" notable subjects are notable, so there actually isn't any valid deletion reason given. DGG (talk) 04:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notability has been demonstrated by the sources cited in the article. I'd much prefer that people didn't peddle such nonsense, but they do, so it's much better that we should have a WP:NPOV article here, in one of the places where people will look for information, than to leave the field clear for the quacks. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2009 (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.