Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KEVA Planks

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 keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KEVA Planks

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

No explanation of significance. Longbyte1 (talk) 22:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems notable to me. Short, but useful. An alternative would be to incorporate the content into the Kapla Blocks article, but that seems more cumbersome. I vote Keep. NCdave (talk) 03:09, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 07:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:16, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - there's no assertion of notability of Kapla either, except for suggestions that they have been used in a couple of notable exhibitions, something that could also be said of the subject. That's not an attempt at WP:OTHERSTUFF; I mention it because I wouldn't be strongly against a merge to Kapla with an explanation that the subject is a US-version of the same. My only reservation is that it's not clear from either article whether they exist in two distinct markets or if they compete. Having competing products listed under one product name could create problems. Stalwart111 03:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:59, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems notable.Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:15, 2 December 2012 (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.