From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 speedy keep. Meets WP:SK#1: Withdrawn by nominator, no other delete arguments (non-admin closure) CThomas3 ( talk) 09:42, 11 June 2019 (UTC) reply

ReMarkable (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Company fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Its product, the tablet, may be notable, and the article is actually a confusing mix of the two topics, but frankly outside infobox it's close to a WP:TNT mess. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost ( talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost ( talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost ( talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Nah, unfortunately, it is you who is misunderstanding policy. Deletion is not improvement. You could have moved the article or you could have re-structured the article, which, granted, like all Wikipedia entries, has room for improvement. Yet you insist on deleting an article which clearly passes the WP:GNG, based on massive WP:DEPTH coverage by numerous WP:RS. Not cool. XavierItzm ( talk) 18:08, 10 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Well, I have little love lost for spam. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:59, 11 June 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Propose that the result ought to be:
The result was speedy keep. Per 
WP:SK#1, the nominator withdrew the nomination, and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted or redirected.
cheers, XavierItzm ( talk) 07:22, 11 June 2019 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 speedy keep. Meets WP:SK#1: Withdrawn by nominator, no other delete arguments (non-admin closure) CThomas3 ( talk) 09:42, 11 June 2019 (UTC) reply

ReMarkable (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Company fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Its product, the tablet, may be notable, and the article is actually a confusing mix of the two topics, but frankly outside infobox it's close to a WP:TNT mess. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost ( talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost ( talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost ( talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Nah, unfortunately, it is you who is misunderstanding policy. Deletion is not improvement. You could have moved the article or you could have re-structured the article, which, granted, like all Wikipedia entries, has room for improvement. Yet you insist on deleting an article which clearly passes the WP:GNG, based on massive WP:DEPTH coverage by numerous WP:RS. Not cool. XavierItzm ( talk) 18:08, 10 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Well, I have little love lost for spam. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:59, 11 June 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Propose that the result ought to be:
The result was speedy keep. Per 
WP:SK#1, the nominator withdrew the nomination, and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted or redirected.
cheers, XavierItzm ( talk) 07:22, 11 June 2019 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook