Talk:Atomic Blox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I was creating an article on the "Atomic Blox" modular building system, and it was summarily deleted. I'd like to establish that it *is* encyclopedic and it's *not* advertising, because I'm not affiliated with either of the companies that have owned it -- and since there are two of them, they're hardly likely to mention each other in their own writings.
Since I can't find any web citations (the few reviews I've seen appear to republish the manufacturer's promotional copy -- there may be cites in offline toy trade publications), I suppose it may run afoul of the "no original research" rule. But if so, shouldn't every Wikipedia article that gives details of a book or TV show also be deleted? (When those details were obtained from the primary source, not an intermediate review of the source.)
I guess I'm unclear on what "original research" means, exactly. "Measuring the spectra of galaxies and thereby devising a new cosmological theory" would be, but is "buying and opening a product at retail" just as much so?
Nether Oddwar 03:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
