Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennic (2nd nomination)

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) 03:03, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jennic[edit]

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

None of the references for this small company seem to be more than trivial PR DGG ( talk ) 15:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to parent company. Not sure why this is at AfD. Two keep votes at last AfD. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The number of keep !votes in the last AfD, which was in 2006, is irrelevant. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Has it become less notable in the last 7 years? If so, how or why? Candleabracadabra (talk) 12:57, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep— It seems notable enough. I added some material with two new sources to the technology section. It seems that they were really the first to support 6LoWPAN networking in their chipsets. That's something, anyway.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:10, 14 January 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, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Besides the typical financial info sources, among the sources cited are some academic books in which independent researchers discuss Jennic's proprietary technology. A quick search in EE Times [1] found plenty of additional articles; some are mildly modified press releases e.g. [2], but others like [3] clearly are not. The situation is similar with EDN (magazine) [4], e.g. this is clearly not just a regurgitated press release. So, I'd say it's pretty notable considering all sources. Also, JenNet-IP could probably be merged with the company article. Someone not using his real name (talk) 09:40, 24 January 2014 (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.