Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HIS - Hightech Information System Limited
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 no consensus. MBisanz talk 02:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- HIS - Hightech Information System Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
probably incorrectly named borderline spam article on a company, whose compliance with WP:CORP may be suspect.The sources used in the article are all self-published and verification is proving difficult: 26 Ghits, most of which are directory listings of cards produced. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The naming issue can be fixed, but HIS appears several times in non-English news sources and in a few Hong Kong Industry directories. I'm pretty sure that it still doesn't pass WP:CORP, but I'm not 100% sure at this time. DARTH PANDAduel 20:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I'm not sure how the nominator managed to form that Google search, but these searches find plenty of sources: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:09, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Search engine results are not evidence of notability. I cannot find significant coverage in english at least. Business directories cannot be used as they are neither independent nor significant. --neon white talk 01:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep: Secondary sources, per WP:CORP, for the company exist, but they are not in "first class" English sources such as PCWorld, News.com, etc. Some "2nd class" sources include PC Advisor UK, bit-tech.net, geek.com. —Noah 20:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, per the sources provided by Noah Salzman above, which are sufficient to show notability. Terraxos (talk) 01:52, 9 January 2009 (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.