Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teleeye

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 Keep while weight of numbers stack up for deletion in this case the question of notability and advertising have been addressed. Article uses primary sources WP:CORP says that PS are acceptable providing notability is established with secondary sources, its listed on HKSE - major stock exchange listings are a good indicator of notability, multiple awards - another good indicator. WP:CORP says by listing it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion if no notable content remains this article does have notable content. Gnangarra 03:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Teleeye

Teleeye (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

Remove: No claim to notability. My search for reliable sources to support notability comes up with nothing. Does being a public company automatically make a company notable? Sounds like a company trying to advertise its products more than an encyclopedia entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbc1960 (talk • contribs) 2007/08/29 10:09:15

  • This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletions. -- KTC 13:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as advertising. Doesn't quite fit the bill for GSD G11, but it needs a lot of NPOV work and I'm not finding any reliable sources either - it's mentioned plenty of places, but always on sites that are trying to sell their products. Hersfold (t/a/c) 13:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Does not satisfy WP:ORG. Needs substantial coverage in independent and reliable sources, and is sourced only to its own website. Perhaps by the end of the AFD period someone can dig out additional sourcing. Edison 15:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - I created this article. Admittedly it was challenging to find sources to establish the minimum notability. However, I hope that the addition of these sources will add to the notability of the article. One, page published by the City University of Hong Kong is an organization snapshot which among the general overview includes a list of industry awards to which the Teleeye Group has received internationally. Secondly, a link to a Teleeye Group page which details the employment of the system in successfully solving a murder case in a Philippine mall. Third, a CityU press release detailing the awards that Teleeye Group has won. Luke! 21:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Remove: Still appears like a company trying to advertise its products more than an encyclopedia entry. Is it really notable? Agree with Hersfold's finding above. Cbc1960 2007/09/02 14:20:15 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbc1960 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment - This is not intended to be a personal attack; however, I find it interesting that the nominating editor's edit history comprises of only 3 edits, all of which have only been to nominate this article for deletion. Perhaps an underlying motive? Luke! 01:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Comment - I came across this article, thought it read like an advetisement, revisited a few days later and it still reads like a self-promotion. In any case, let's not get personal, we should let the article speak for itself. Cbc1960 3 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbc1960 (talk • contribs)
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.