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 delete. czar 15:04, 8 July 2017 (UTC)reply
The only (possibly) independent source is an article about the company's acquisition. No claim of notability is made.
Rentier (
talk) 06:47, 1 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete: A company with over 40 years operating in its field but aside from occasional product reviews (such as
"Popular Science" 1977) I am seeing only routine announcements around patents, the 2006 take-over of the company, etc.: insufficient to meet
WP:CORPDEPTH or
WP:GNG.
AllyD (
talk) 09:26, 1 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.