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 17:28, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

InfoTM[edit]

InfoTM (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:CORP. In addition to the source in the article, I found [1] and [2] but both are press releases. I can't find any non-passing mentions of the company. shoy (reactions) 14:26, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In case it's not obvious, the point of having this article is its ARM SoCs that were referenced elsewhere in Wikipedia, as done for other smaller Chinese SoC companies like Nufront. So, objection to deletion. I don't really care if the article is called InfoTM (the brand) or gets renamed to cover only their iMAPx product series - those are in fact being mentioned beyond press releases, e.g., [3]. The only other Wikipedia page referencing the company itself was Arteris. --Andreasfa (talk) 15:51, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A forum is not a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards. shoy (reactions) 17:45, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm not using a forum as a source for the article! I am rather pointing out that InfoTM's iMAPx SoCs are notable because - contrary to your claim of there being only press releases about the company - there are non-Chinese users of devices with those chips, as proven by Web hits that you conveniently ignore... There's YouTube videos of such tablets, Wikis and what not. Is that so hard to understand? The forum link I mentioned is about a Spanish (i.e., non-Chinese) netbook, and these days it's even easy to buy Chinese tablets right off AliExpress. Note that I am in no way affiliated with that company, so please be constructive and propose changes rather than calling for deletion of information useful to technical people like me: I saw that the Cortex-A template listed the chips but did not have a Wikipedia link for them, so I created a page with more info, copying the structure from other existing Wikipedia pages linked there. If you prefer that info to be presented differently, make a suggestion. --Andreasfa (talk) 19:36, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not arguing that these products don't exist. Wikipedia's concept of notability may be different that your personal definition, so I would advise you to check our notability guideline to see exactly what is required for an article. YouTube videos and wikis are also user-generated content, so they are not reliable sources either. If you can find, for example, a tech news website that has covered these chips extensively, or an electronics magazine, those would be the kind of reliable sources that this article would need. shoy (reactions) 19:57, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for now unless better Chinese sources can be found. SwisterTwister talk 06:03, 11 October 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.