Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YSI 2300 STAT PLUS Glucose and Lactate Analyzer

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. Sandstein 06:31, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

YSI 2300 STAT PLUS Glucose and Lactate Analyzer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Unconvinced from references that this is notable to the extent that it meets the guidelines at WP:PRODUCT standalone. It might be worth taking parts of this and incorporating this into the company's article, but not enough thats usable to consider an immediate merge in my opinion. Mike1901 (talk) 20:17, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Medicine. Bsoyka (talk) 22:53, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The YSI 2300 analyzer was the de facto reference standard for glucose (and glucometer) readings in the US (and thus probably abroad) for the past 30-40 years. When they announced its discontinuation, a conference with 60 attendees was held to determine a successor. It is notable for being the reference standard due to its widespread use and history, rather than due to a regulatory requirement. The glucometer reading space is quite crowded and its notable for having remained the standard until its literal discontinuation. GobsPint (talk) 03:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect and merge to Xylem Inc.#YSI. See WP:PRODUCT for rationale. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 09:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm referring to this from WP:PRODUCT

  If a company is notable, information on its products and services should generally be included in the article on the company itself, unless the company article is so large that this would make the article unwieldy.

  — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:09, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 10 April 2022 (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.