Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thync

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 speedy keep. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:23, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thync[edit]

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

~~Un-notable product. Eat me, I'm a red bean (talk · contribs) 12:26, 18 September 2015 (UTC)~~ I withdraw the nomination. Eat me, I'm a red bean (talk · contribs) 12:11, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The case made for deletion by red bean is mere proof by assertion, and reflects failures to (1) read the article carefully (it's about a company, not a product), and (2) perform some due diligence before AfD nom, considering that a news search turns up not only the sources cited already in the article at this writing (Technology Review, Wall Street Journal -- possibly enough to establish notability in themselves), but many more: at CNN [1][2], The Independent [3], Bloomberg [4], USA Today [5], not to speak of all the gadget-review websites. Of course, it's a crappy article at this point. I should know: I wrote it. But "crappy" =/= "un-notable". I almost sandboxed it, but then thought, "No, maybe the next thing that happens is somebody will be WP:BOLD and improve it. So be WP:BOLD and create it." Unfortunately, there's always the possibility in such cases that "what happens next" will be something counterproductive. Like an itchy-trigger-finger AfD nom :-( Yakushima (talk) 04:45, 19 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.