Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VIA Technologies shareholders and subsidiaries

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:00, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

VIA Technologies shareholders and subsidiaries[edit]

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

Useless article with inaccurate information (HTC is owned by VIA? Citation needed.), redlink farm. ViperSnake151 Talk 04:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This might have been relevant ten years ago. VIA Technologies is not particularly notable any more, as evidenced by all those redlinks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the main article on the firm. That they are no longer an important firm is irrelevant; they once were. WP in an encyclopedia , a permanent record of the present and the past, not a current business directory. But this never would have been a valid separate article. 'DGG (at NYPL) (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:10, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 19:42, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I would say merge to VIA Technologies but I see no content here that is reliably-sourced and would add to the parent article. AllyD (talk) 06:10, 16 September 2013 (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.