Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caseable

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Caseable

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

The page / company do not meet the notability criteria ..... Brownbarons (talk) 16:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion this company does meet the notability criteria because it has been the first supplier of customizable laptop covers back in 2010. That's somehow innovative. It probably is not the only one anymore and does not have the biggest market share, but still I found this remarkable about the company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KategorischerImperativ (talk • contribs) 16:10, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That claim of being the first was referenced to a site billed as "We tell your story to the world!" - reliable source would be needed to support the claim, and at any rate I am unconvinced that it would be in itself evidence of notability. AllyD (talk) 07:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for your advice. I have searched for a better source and I found a newspaper article about the company. I still believe that caseable is worth to be talked about. KategorischerImperativ (talk) 10:04, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Articles about the company at Wirtschaftswoche, t3n Magazin, a Fast Company site, Die Welt, and a Forbes blog make it notable under GNG; the depth of coverage was obscured by the use of bare URLs. I've cleaned it up a bit, although I have also posted a question to the talk page regarding where it is legally based. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:00, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for cleaning up the sources. I think now it is more obvious that caseable got quite some buzz from newspapers, too. KategorischerImperativ (talk) 10:39, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:35, 16 December 2013 (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.