Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pathpartner Technology

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 03:20, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pathpartner Technology[edit]

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

non notable. Interesting wording from the single purpose account who contributed the article : "Pathpartner seems to provide product engineering services", "Pathpartner has been seen working closely with semiconductor companies"-- Isee that as an attempt to pretend to be nonpromotional. Awards are very minor. DGG ( talk ) 17:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now as my first searches instantly found PR and other self-generated content here and at browser. SwisterTwister talk 18:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 18:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 18:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 18:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

where can I get the complete list of discussion comments on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinaymk (talk • contribs) 05:25, 4 September 2015 (UTC) Nasscom EMERGE 50 awards are notable awards given in India and Dun and Bradstreet awards are also reputed and not bought over the counter. I've removed the other line refered in the comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinaymk (talk • contribs) 05:42, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vinaymk All comments about that will be here and what would help the article is better third-party coverage such as news and magazine. SwisterTwister talk 05:53, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks SwisterTwister. I've added press coverage from engadget, siliconindia and dnaindia - which are credible news sources, with decent readership, links from Xilinx and TI are also credible third-party source I believe. Vinaymk (talk) 16:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 14:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't put much faith in the TI and Xilinx links as "sources". They are business partners, so of course the source is going to try to make the company look good. Those "sources" will mean something if you are in the semiconductor business; a general reader will have no idea what they mean. Still lacks notability outside of the very narrow world it inhabits of writing internal code for Integrated Circuits. Now if the New York Times or the Guardian has something to say, that would be different.New Media Theorist (talk) 17:36, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semiconductors is an important field in modern world, dnaindia is a credible online news media in India and engadget means a lot to techies. I want to believe that wikipedia represents everything and everyone in this world Vinaymk (talk) 19:16, 9 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Delete as per nom and above editors. Searches returned nothing to show that this company meets WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:58, 16 September 2015 (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.