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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Non-notable product. Kelly ^hi! 18:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It's not a product, but a series of prototypes done by a fellow in Belgium. The article asserts that these are connected with commercial models now being produced, but there is no evidence to back it up. A google search showed a lot of blog and forum mentions, and not much else. Cute hamster though. Seaphoto^Talk 18:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (possibly speedy}: unsourced article promoting prototype. Possible G11 candidate. No evidence of notability. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 05:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep images: Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater here, the images seem entirely useful in other articles. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The images are up for deletion (separately) because they are copied from a website, but are missing evidence of permission to do so. Peacock (talk) 17:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The products eventually developed from these types of prototypes may be notable, but I don't see evidence of notability for the prototypes themselves. Peacock (talk) 17:54, 3 January 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.