Deletion of Save the Netbooks

Comment: insufficient evidence of notability.  There are lots of sources thoroughly documenting the dispute between Dell and Psion and the netbooks trademark issue: the dispute, the lawsuit, and responses to it are certainly appropriate for coverage in Wikipedia, and may even be appropriate for coverage in its own article.  However, virtually nothing has been said about the "Save the Netbooks" campaign or website in reliable sources: it has been mentioned, but that's about it -- certainly not enough for the basis of an entire article.  The level of sourcing demonstrated seems enough to me that we can mention the Save the Networks campaign in relation to the trademark dispute. but we can't sustain an article on it.  The current article is unacceptable per  and .  This dispute is already covered at Psion and possibly other places; this framing of it gives vastly unequal weight to those with a particular opinion, and serves to promote the campaign rather than report on it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP||WP:POVFORK)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)

Comment: WP:SOAP, , and notability concerns. The term is clearly notable, but the movement doesn't seem to be at this point. I might support a highly abridged merge to the main article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)

Comment: for not having meeting the |notability guidelines and for its |promotional intent
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:PROMOTION)

Comment: Leaving out the COI issue, as I stated on the talk page the sources used in the article do not satisfy notability requirements.  They are mostly trivial sources, or press releases.  None of the stated links fulfill the reliable, secondary sources requirement.  A Google search is not a clear justification for keeping a page in Wikipedia. A site getting 20,000 or 30,000 page hits does not make it notable either.  Those numbers are irrelevant.  I would agree with the comment that the subject can be covered very well under the Netbook article, and this page comes off as propaganda for the website it covers.  As for valid reasons to delete the article, see otability in addition to  as all articles have to meet the general Notability requirements.  To quote from that page: "'Presumed' means that substantive coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, of notability. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not suitable for inclusion. For example, it may violate hat_Wikipedia_is_not|what Wikipedia is not."  Going by hat_Wikipedia_is_not|What Wikipedia Is Not: "Wikipedia considers the historical notability of persons and events. News coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, but not all events warrant an encyclopedia article of their own. Routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article. Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall topic." Based on the evidence from these guidelines, this article should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:WEB||WP:W||WP:W)

Comment: per  and insufficient notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)