Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ardaco

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 all - Failing WP:CORP. —— Eagle101 Need help? 03:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ardaco

non-notable company and products. Google only 633 hit [1]--Evpf 22:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment: It seems like this might be okay for inclusion, but the pages seem to read like adverts almost. At best, there appears to be heavy bias in favor of the company. Perhaps add criticism? I'll refrain from making a deletion recommendation, however. -SocratesJedi | Talk 22:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete All It is very obvious they all fail WP:CORP badly. No notibility is asserted in any article. Last 3 articles are non-notable products for the company, making them entirely spam.--Dacium 22:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Explanation I'm author of original articles. I'm just started with Wikipedia but my goal was not to write spam articles. I agree that content of article must be improved. But many of other successful articles on Wikipedia started with worst content. If you can help me with my work, I would be very glad. And also, the company and products are not oriented for mass-market. But I don't think that this argument cannot be applied as reason for deletion. Company and products can be world-wide significant. So I guess that non of the article meet the criteria for deletion according Wikipedia deletion policy. So please, remove deletion tag from articles and rather help me to improve articles. Palat 23:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. At the moment, there is no evidence of the following:
1. Non-trivial published works about the company/products, OR
2. Widespread use of the products.
Evidence of one of these must be found, or the assumption will be that the company is not yet notable enough for Wikipedia. For example, if newspapers, magazines, or websites have published articles on the company or its products, you need to bring this information to everyone's attention (by adding the info to the article or noting it here.) You state that the products are "world-wide significant" -- show us evidence of this, please. --N Shar 00:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all per failure of WP:CORP; Ardaco per the corporation notability criteria, and the rest per the products or services criteria. Nowhere in the article could I find a mention of anything that would come close to meeting them. It might be possible that in their current form they are somewhat spammish, due to the lack of notability assertations, they do appear to be written from a NPOV. I don't immediately get the vibe that the product articles are saying 'buy me'. Still, in the current form, they must go. Kyra~(talk) 05:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Why not delete I will try to describe what should improve given articles to meet Wikipedia criteria.
    • Ardaco is company from Slovakia. List of Slovak companies is the list of Slovak company on Wikipedia. Ardaco is second IT company from Slovakia on Wikipedia. First is Eset and I think Ardaco has more useful article.
    • Ardaco is security oriented company, it cannot be world-wide widespread, but it's widespread in security and research oriented areas.
    • Ardaco is member of Nessi (European Technology Platform on Software and Services) - [2].
    • On December 2006 SecureCall was certified by NBU (Slovak National Security Agency). Here is scan of certificate.
    • There are many independent articled about SecureCall but most of them are in slovak language (one of them [3]).
    • Few weak ago at many internet IT magazines was published article about new technology from India (original article - [4]). It was world-wide widespread article. PDMark is based on same principles. It can store less than GB of data but it's real technology which is used in many countries (most distant can be Peru).

This and many other information I would like to add to articles but it takes me more time. So I hope you should be more patient and allows me or better help me to improve content of articles. It's really not fair from you because some of you never improve more articles on Wikipedia then me. And I admit that I'm novice on Wikipedia and need help or some more time.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, trialsanderrors 00:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. Someone who speaks the language should examine source #3 and determine if it meets WP:RS. Other sources attest to the existence of the company and to the truth of the facts in the article, but these were not in doubt. The question is not merely "Does the company do what is claimed in the article?" but "Should a company that does what is claimed in the article be included in Wikipedia?" I will refrain from making a recommendation to delete at this time. --N Shar 01:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all The author was not able to provide reference as requested. My search for notability and verification did not lead to support the article. Jeepday 01:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
To address the comment above about "Should a company that does what is claimed in the article be included in Wikipedia?" Wikipedia and editors can not see the future of what should or should not be included in the future. Each article has to stand on its own. 01:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all - fails WP:CORP. Don't forget to delete the template as well. MER-C 04:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and do NOT delete. Rewrite however may be needed. LHOON 14:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • delete per all aboveOo7565 18:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all. I'm always suspect of articles that read something like "leading technological company". it also seems like people who want this article to be kept believe that there is some inherint prejudice against slovak companies etc. I assure you that is not the case. --Tainter 19:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all as per nominator and Dacium above. Spam for a non-notable company. A Train take the 20:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Added information in SecureCall article:
    • information about SecureCallGov version
    • updated History chapter
    • added Criticism chapter

Now, I hope article meet the requirements for WP:CORP. Palat 11:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

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.