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 of the debate was delete – Gurch 13:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I have blanked it as part of tagging as copyvio. Please vote on this version of the article, as that is how it was before blanking. Viridae^Talk 10:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An optical disk format allegedly capable of holding 10,000 Gbytes of data on one disk. Won an award in 1999 but for some reason still not commercially available. This page at CD freaks discusses it. About the kindest thing it says is: high probablity cannot work outside a lab environment. Probable vanity article. (And anyway it's a copyvio from http://www.dntb.ro/users/frdbuc/hyper-cdrom/hyper.htm .) -- RHaworth 08:52, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Obvious copyvio, so the current content should go, but the topic sounds fascinating. Keep if anyone is willing to rewrite (even as a stub), otherwise delete. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 10:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment tagged as a copyvio. Viridae^Talk 10:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep, this seems like it might be barely notable enough for my standards when it comes to technology because it is a revolutionary design, instead of something like a slightly improved inkjet printer. There is a PC World article on it in addition to the CD Freaks one. Obviously, it needs to be rewritten. The group TLC released something they called a Hyper CD, too. If they are mentioned, then strong delete as per WP:SPITE. -- Kjkolb 11:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per Zetawoof. -- Kjkolb 09:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a briefly well-publicized hoax. Most of the press releases and articles point to a single site, and date back to 2001 or 2002, while stating that this would be available "within a year". As there's been no further word from the good Doctor, it seems safe to assume that this went nowhere; it's entirely possible that the technology was entirely fictitious. In particular, the main photo looks suspiciously like a normal CD-ROM drive with a few ordinary CDs sitting in front of it, and the technical explanation is even captioned as a diagram of a LCSM (laser confocal scanning microscope), not a rewritable drive! Zetawoof^(ζ) 07:24, 29 June 2006 (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.