Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BJFE Guitar Effects

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. Courcelles 13:50, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BJFE Guitar Effects

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

Basically an advert. No third party, notable, reliable sources. References consist of links to product owner's manuals, first person interview (promotional), other are blogs. In particular, the lists of products are not notable and what made me notice the article in the first place, but I cannot find anything reliable abiut the company, either. Kilmer-san (talk) 04:41, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. — —Tom Morris (talk) 05:57, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm sure references from elsewhere (eg: product details in independent distributors or magazines) can be found. This page should be cleaned up, not deleted. --Ritchie333 (talk) 13:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:19, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:17, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

delete It seems like an advert to me. even citations to other distributors wouldn't convince me that it wasn't. I'd think that the only kind of references that would make a product like this notable would be from popular culture, from histories of modern music, or from guidebooks for musicians, along the lines of the Marshall stack, an article that by contrast shows what's missing from this one. Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:43, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One reason it may sound like an advert is that it is heavily plagiarised from this interview DuplicationDetector results Chaosdruid (talk) 19:25, 26 July 2011 (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.