Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natami (2nd nomination)
I am re-pasting my opinion from the original AfD, as it has not changed, as well as a followup comment I wrote in the original discussion...unsure why this went straight back online and not to DRV, but here we go again) merge any |verifiable content to the Amiga#Amiga hardware clones|Amiga article's hardware clones section. Total lack of |reliable sources, and while I, as a geek, have considerable sympathy for the outpouring of-style arguments above, they are not in any way good arguments for inclusion. The "Obligement" source is the closest thing we have to a passable source but I can't find any evidence on the site that it would pass muster as a reliable source, per the|relevant guidelines. Micro Mart might suffice as a reliable source if anyone could produce the alleged coverage and if it is significant, independent, etc. I note that a search for "Natami" on Micro Mart's website produces zero results, although I do know that that does not necessarily mean that they have never featured this product in print. Regarding AmigaFuture, I think the original reviewing admin said it best regarding whether a publication of such limited scope can actually be used to establish notability. It's certainly verifiable, but...it reminds me of using a local newspaper to demonstrate the local notability of a local politician. Which is to say, it reminds me of something that's not notable
— User:Ginsengbomb, 06:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:RELIABLE||WP:ILIKEIT||WP:RELIABLE (Wikipedia:Verifiability)