Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mobile Suit Gundam SEED mobile weapons (2nd nomination)
Reply to Folken on the DrV, The ''magazine'' you linked to is not a magazine, it is a series of books published by Futabasha, called the ''Common Knowledge of...'', which also includes other topics like gemstones and the Edo period.  This particular one is ''Common Knowledge of Gunpla'' it does give out a 1/288 model, yet it is a gift, not a product.  The book talks about the history of Gunpla, which is actually a very prominent hobby in Japan, in which the hobby magazine, Hobby Japan, which was first published 10 years before First Gundam have significant coverage of it per issue.  Bandai has its own catalogs and history books, and multiple other companies also does the same thing, it is very reasonable that all businesses want to take a bite out of something that can make money, that is why there are dozens of publishers publishing thousands of Gundam related books, including Gakken, a publisher that published mainly educational products, also published at least two books on the One Year War, which is not much more than plot summary other than some fictional strategy analysis.  Giving out gifts along with books are also very common in Japan, http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4056043396 Like this one it would be entirely funny if this particular issue made Gakken a complete COI that anything it publishes cannot give notability to the Newton telescope because it produces Newton telescopes(not that it needed any, but you get my point).  Per : '' "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject or its creator. For example, self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, and press releases are not considered independent.4'', and ''4 Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of notability. See also: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for handling of such situations.''  First, I must seek your consensus that ''affiliation'' does not equal to publication of related material, because nothing can have sources since all sources are basically a direct publication of relate material.  Also, COI cannot be a simple market driven relationship, meaning a scientific journal needs scientific breakthrough to continue publication, so it is pretty heavily related to the market and will have to publish related material for its business survival.  Every other major publishers, if not all, in Japan had publications related to Gundam, it triggered an anime boom after all, so if we follow your method, Gundam cannot be notable due to all sources will be affiliated.  Great Mechanics is not a self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiography or press release, it is also not work produced by the subject and the company is producing prominently other publications not related thus the connection is very weak. —Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|signed comment added by
— User:Mythsearcher, 02:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)