Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apex Digital

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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 22:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apex Digital[edit]

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

May not be notable as per Wikipedia guidelines. No references provided. Google search did not provide anything substantial. Please add references if notable. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:40, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I removed an inappropriately detailed product list. DGG ( talk ) 18:00, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:53, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (cackle) @ 21:00, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is not appropriate for nominators to speculate about notability. Notability research should be done WP:BEFORE nomination. Subject appears to be notible - see [1] and [2] for instance. ~KvnG 02:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KvnG but is it enough? The 1st link you shared is only a passing reference that it is sued by MPEG LA and the 2nd reference you have mentioned give more info about "ApeXtreme" rather than Apex. The only thing it says about Apex is that "Unfortunately, Apex wasn't able to bring it to market". That's all. Please mention if any references are present which has WP:DEPTH. I might be wrong if the references provided by you suffice Coredepth or not. So let the AFD run its course so that others can jugde.Thank You.Lakun.patra (talk) 05:26, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe it is enough. The links I provided were examples. I found a total 230 news hits on Apex Digital at HighBeam Research. I assumed based on this and the language in your deletion reason that you had not researched notability before nominating. Was this a bad assumption? ~KvnG 16:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Sources aplenty: New York Times, Wired, LA Times, CNN... May be worth noting that it was the best selling DVD player in the USA (don't know how far its reach was) for a while, but that's just me saying that -- the sources speak for themselves. PS: These were available in the first several pages of google hits. --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:05, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing Nomination as several references are there to prove that the article is notable.Lakun.patra (talk) 11:35, 1 January 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.