Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lake Mower
At this point, I would still lean towards '''delete'''. To be more specific than I was before: (1) The lead refers only to one brand, by the brand name, and is sourced to the company's website. (2) There are only two sources that satisfy : the inline cite to a municipal report (#6), and the inline cite to the Washington State Dept. of Ecology (#10), and neither really establishes notability. Cites #1, 2, 3, 5, and 14 go to the company's website and are promotional. Cites #4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 15, and 16 are essentially paid advertisements. Cites #12 and 13 are dead links. (3) The external link is also the company's website. (4) Even after the new edits, the page still contains "Many long-time customers have given the Lake Mower generally positive reviews" and "one of the most cost-effective mechanical aquatic weed control methods available." Maybe it would be best to userify until the page can be made encyclopedic
— User:Tryptofish, 20:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)