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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - TheMagnificentist 08:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - Significant coverage in reliable sources. Non-english sources are acceptable for establishing notability. ~
Kvng (
talk) 14:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment Please post links to what you consider to be the significant coverage in reliable sources.
-- HighKing++ 16:33, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete The references in the article are either produced by the company or are announcements relating to funding. Fails
WP:CORPDEPTH,
WP:ORGIND and GNG.
-- HighKing++ 16:33, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:25, 20 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete unless better sources can be found. The South China Morning Post article is a good start but everything else that I can read fails
WP:CORPDEPTH.
shoy (
reactions) 18:07, 20 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak delete as per
User:Shoy. The Apple Daily article is only a paragraph.
Matt's talk 08:57, 25 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete -- an advertorial for an insignificant company. Insufficient reliable, independent sourcing. Basically spam.
K.e.coffman (
talk) 03:37, 28 July 2017 (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.