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. Cirt (talk) 19:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ELWO[edit]

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

Does not appear notable; indeed, it seems like nothing more than a robot designed by a university/school robotics class. A few mentions in local media as may be expected when university students do something "interesting" (for lack of a better word), but nothing that appears to satisfy significant coverage in WP:RS that would be indicative of notability. Also apparent WP:COI. Contested PROD. --Kinu ^t/_c 17:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on an unrelated note, the scanned newspaper clippings included in the article may be copyvios in themselves and should be dealt with accordingly. --Kinu ^t/_c 20:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: article-creator, who is only substantial contributor, has blanked the page. I unblanked per drmafd, but the action could be a recognition that the article isn't viable or similar trigger of WP:CSD#G7. DMacks (talk) 07:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see any specific notability for this school project. Local media cover local human-interest items all the time (there are news cites, but it's not serious in-depth coverage except the local-interest angle as far as I can tell) and I don't see in-depth reporting from "RS from afar" (true uninvolved party). DMacks (talk) 01:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - advertisement; "further reading" all irrelevant to THIS article. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find any reliable sources that provide significant coverage of this robot. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 22:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:RS WP:N. Crafty (talk) 22:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of notability. Such robots are built individually by 10 yrs old in Japan. Anyone who walked in a local school robotic competition there would see dozens of better ones. Materialscientist (talk) 01:57, 29 September 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.