Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
*'''support''' per ''proposers'' rationale--] (]) 17:35, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
*'''support''' per ''proposers'' rationale--] (]) 17:35, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
*'''support''' not sufficiently notable for its own article. Needs more mainstream mention. ] (]) 19:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
*'''support''' not sufficiently notable for its own article. Needs more mainstream mention. ] (]) 19:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
*'''support''' This article just covers the same ground as ], each of which is barely notable, if that. --] (]) 20:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
<s>*'''support''' This article just covers the same ground as ], each of which is barely notable, if that. --] (]) 20:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)<s/>
===Oppose===
===Oppose===
Revision as of 00:17, 17 May 2017
Text and/or other creative content from Juul (electronic cigarette) was copied or moved into PAX Labs. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
A notable ecigs with mutliple independent sources documenting it. PAX Labs make other products as well. This has received significiant coverage. Valoem15:38, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ozzie10aaaa:, @Jim1138:, and @Doc James:, I'm always sadden to see lack of research before coming to make a decision. I am requested this merge go to AfD where I am confident I will survive, I wrote this article in 2015, I haven't updated it since, after all Misplaced Pages is a collaborative effort, unfortunately this did not happen. Since 2017 there have been over 60 independent sources giving this device significant coverage. There are these sources New York Legal Examiner, The Chronicle, the former is scientific study There isn't a snowball's chance in hell this would be deleted Just to speed things up I would recommend AfD. Or maybe if we decide to work with together, we can expand this article and drop the merge discussion all together. Valoem20:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
And I'm always saddened to see a shill desperately trying to preserve free advertising for their company in such a naked manner. If you want to take this AfD, feel free to do so. The content and sources here cover essentially just the same as those at PAX Labs. There's really no encyclopedic value in providing two lots of free advertising for an unremarkable company and its products. --RexxS (talk) 20:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
By your statements claims all products written by an established user is advertising. This product has received significant attention and is widely used enough that people would be interested in reading about it in an encyclopedia. I've provided third party sources.
It's not received significant mention in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. It fails GNG. It fails WP:PLUG. It fails to have consensus of editors to be separated from its parent article. --RexxS (talk) 22:29, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
@RexxS: Your second statement needs explaining: Are you suggesting that I work for the company and that I am here in bad faith? I've had over ten years experience so if you really want to go down this path, promise you ANI. I recommend you review my history and my work at DRV. Perhaps you misjudged. Regardless am I not an editor you want to be making such accusations against I am as equally qualified as you. I believe this product passes our GN guidelines which is why I favor keeping not because of your ridiculously "advertising" accusation. Valoem21:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
I couldn't care less who you work for and only you know whether you edit in bad faith or not. It's remarkable that an editor with over ten years experience knows so little of the requirements for a stand-alone article, but feel free to try ANI, just don't forget WP:BOOMERANG. I've not misjudged what your doing here: you're defending having two articles when it's obvious that there's barely enough encyclopedic material for one. What your reasons for that mistake are, is something for you to ponder. Don't bother trying to threaten me, because you're obviously nowhere near as qualified as I. The requirements for a stand-alone article are three-fold: (1) it satisfies WP:GNG; (2) it is not disqualified by WP:NOT; (3) it has the consensus of editors that it should be a stand-alone article, rather than a part of a larger article. I heard you the first time you said you believed it meets GNG. But it doesn't. You have still to address WP:NOT, in particular WP:NOTADVERTISING, which it fails. And on top of all that, the consensus forming here is to merge the Juul (electronic cigarette) stub into PAX Labs. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 22:29, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
And I'm always saddened to see a shill desperately trying to preserve free advertising for their company in such a naked manner.
”
This is a personal attack I took the high road and was civil toward, you I said I am equally qualified as you, which is not an insult, but to be more professional in your tone with established editors. The truth is I am FAR more qualified than you. I've been here for ten years and made over 200 articles compared to your 24. Merge discussions and can always be overriden in AfD. I said nothing against you yet instead of apologizing you attack me. This is a clear indication of being not here to build an encyclopedia. You have disqualified yourself from this article discussion. I see you are in your 60s, please act your age.. Valoem00:04, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
