Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HiSilicon

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. MBisanz ^talk 05:25, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HiSilicon

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

This was speedy deleted under A7 but this was contested at DRV and the consensus was to list at AFD to( discuss sources provided during the DRV discussion. The sources mentioned are:- HiSilicon is a division of Huawei, dedicated to ARM SoC they made partnerships with ARM and Linaro to develop last and future ARM technologies IP.

ARM Company Profile
EE Times [1]
Linaro HiSilicon Joins Linaro as Core Member
DigiTimes [2]
TheStreet.com HiSilicon Licenses Range Of ARM Mali Graphics Processors To Drive The Next Generation Of Smart, Connected Devices
New Electronics HiSilicon licenses ARM Mali gpus to drive next gen smart devices
CNET Google's WebM patent pals agree to share
HiSilicon Unveils Quad-Core Cortex A9 K3V2 Processor (Hi3620)
soso.com encyclopedia 海思半导体 (chinese name of the company)
hudong.com encyclopedia (world's largest Chinese encyclopedia) 深圳海思半导体 (HiSilicon, Shenzhen).
windosi.com (a chinese national newspaper about semiconductor industry 海思半导体成长为本土最大的IC设计企业 (Translation : HiSilicon (海思半导体) has grown as the biggest national (in China) integrated circuit conception company).
hc360.com 海思半导体和寰龙技术结成战略合作伙伴 (HiSilicon and Freescale made a strategic partnership)

As the DRV closer I take no position in this discussion an am neutral. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As the article stands, and I had to go back several revisions to see it, the sources within it are either primary sources or press release material. I can see no independent sources asserting or verifying notability. I think we are at a stage of 'not yet, maybe never' for notability. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:24, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cnx-software is about embedded devices I addedd a link, that is an analysis using press release and speak a lot of HiSilicon (they search using google.com/cse is blacklisted here) without press release (on exhibition show, and computer/phone makers using their device). The Linaro press release is from Linaro, not from HiSilicon. Some other are from ARM, not from HiSilicon. Digitimes (search on their site, article are for member only), wrote about 20 articles about HiSilicon.Popolon (talk) 19:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The chinese name of this company gets a lot of ghits. I don't read chinese and I know bugger all about the semiconductor industry, but my sense is that this that the problem here is that the sources are all in chinese rather than english. Can the article be moved to Wikipedia:AfC or somewhere to accumulate refs? Stuartyeates (talk) 05:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:07, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why for create a new one, if there is already one ? I spent lot of time to get all this informations.Popolon (talk) 11:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't know what the state of the article was when it was CSD'd but there are at least three English-language references there that would put it past WP:CORP. I'd say this company is notable enough. §FreeRangeFrog 03:13, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theo polisme 14:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete There is some puffery, and the notability of the article is borderline. If there are more (good) sources introduced, i will change my position. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 20:59, 24 November 2012 (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.