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.
Keep. Well-sourced stub. The in depth sources now include:
Business Insider, Laptop Magazine,
Digital Trends,
Popular Mechanics,
Gizmodo, and others. Very, very clearly meets and exceeds
WP:GNG. The article includes both content on the company and on its namesake products. Could separation/detail between either be improved, sure!, all articles have room for improvement. But deletion is not rewrite, so keep it!
XavierItzm (
talk)
18:17, 8 June 2019 (UTC)reply
@
XavierItzm: You are still missing the point - their tablet may be notable, but the company is not. The sources you mention review the tablet, not the company. If you or anyone else wants to rewrite it as a tablet article, I'll likely withdraw this. But the article, currently, is about the company (with tablet info thrown in), and the company fails at notability. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here03:00, 10 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
Comment I did quick and dirty rewrite changing article subject from the company to its product. The article seems to be still somewhat promotional, but notability should not be an issue now (eg. I found this review in the German ct magazine:
[1] and another quite big review on golem.de
[2]).
Pavlor (
talk)
05:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
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.
Keep. Well-sourced stub. The in depth sources now include:
Business Insider, Laptop Magazine,
Digital Trends,
Popular Mechanics,
Gizmodo, and others. Very, very clearly meets and exceeds
WP:GNG. The article includes both content on the company and on its namesake products. Could separation/detail between either be improved, sure!, all articles have room for improvement. But deletion is not rewrite, so keep it!
XavierItzm (
talk)
18:17, 8 June 2019 (UTC)reply
@
XavierItzm: You are still missing the point - their tablet may be notable, but the company is not. The sources you mention review the tablet, not the company. If you or anyone else wants to rewrite it as a tablet article, I'll likely withdraw this. But the article, currently, is about the company (with tablet info thrown in), and the company fails at notability. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here03:00, 10 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
Comment I did quick and dirty rewrite changing article subject from the company to its product. The article seems to be still somewhat promotional, but notability should not be an issue now (eg. I found this review in the German ct magazine:
[1] and another quite big review on golem.de
[2]).
Pavlor (
talk)
05:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)reply
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.
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.