Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yaesu FRG-7700

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 no consensus. I guess that given the conspicuous lack of interest in this topic there's nothing to stop anybody from going ahead with the proposed merger, though. Sandstein 08:59, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yaesu FRG-7700

)

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

Non-notable electronic product. Not enough references or coverage to justify its own article.afd Mikeblas (talk) 01:12, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:15, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 03:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this is a member of a family of "Foxtrot Tango" radio receivers that together probably rise to notability but individually probably do not. E.g., Yaesu FT-7(B) is a member of the family with a materially similar page. Whatever the result of this discussion is should probably apply to the rest of the items listed at Yaesu_(brand)#Amateur_radio_transceivers_.28HF.29. One option would be to merge into a new article for the FT series as a whole.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:48, 2 January 2017 (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.