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 Redirect to List_of_Nokia_products#Nokia_1xxx_series_.E2.80.93_Ultrabasic_series. As User:Mikeblas says, Wikipedia is not a Nokia catalogue. No Keep votes give any rationale for doing so.Black Kite 16:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nokia 1200[edit]

Nokia 1200 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable commercial product. Completely unreferenced and reads like an advertisement. Too few substantial independent third-party references exist to support a wikipedia article that is itself not a review or a advert. Wikipedia is not a Nokia catalog. Wikipedia is not a cell-phone directory. Mikeblas (talk) 21:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Update I have added more references, so your comments are no longer relevant. Snowman (talk) 13:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't say no longer relevant, especially since two sources are hardly independent as they come from a "Nokia Museum". My original redirect vote still stands. Travellingcari (talk) 16:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • By common sense a mobile phone manufactured by Nokia is notable. Snowman (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2008 (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.