Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silicon Storage Technology

Silicon Storage Technology

No indication this company meets WP:CORP notability standards Tan | 39 19:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Have you checked? A few seconds glance at the Google News results yields coverage in Forbes, FOX News and CNET News. Not that these reports on minor stock movements confer notability, but they certainly indicate the topic passes the sniff test. Skomorokh 20:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did check, thanks for asking. Like the nomination said, I didn't see any significant coverage. Thus I started the AfD, so other people could do their own research and weigh in. Feel free to cast a !vote. Tan | 39 20:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. This is very spammy and was started by User:Sstinc, so I would normally kill it on sight as a spam article. However, this company is clearly notable. Therefore, I am sitting on the fence on this one. Jesse Viviano (talk) 20:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. According to Hoovers this is a significant company with sales of US$315 and 600+ employees. WP:CORP states

sufficient independent sources usually exist for such companies that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage, analyst reports, and profiles by companies such as Hoover's (a commercial source).

So yes, the current article is spammy and needs cleaning up, but shouldn't be deleted on notability grounds. Savlonn (talk) 20:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]