Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AVADirect


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

AVADirect

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Spammy article about non-notable custom computer system builders; long history of seeming COI edits Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  02:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) It's very much a notable company. It's one of six existing small computer manufacturing companies in America, it's shown up in every major computer magazine...how is it not notable? And as for COI edits...I work for a competitor and I am actually trying to keep this article up because our industry is so niche and is an endangered species, so to speak. We all stick together. Just because you're not familiar with this industry doesn't mean it's "not notable". --HeatherMTaylor (talk) 20:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC) — HeatherMTaylor (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Needs a lot of work to remove POV pushing, IMHO needs to be be semi-protected.Troyster87 (talk) 02:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - How is it non-notable? Is it because there are no sources, no coverage, or the long-history of COI issues? Rilak (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply - The ground for deletion is non-notability: i.e., no sources, no coverage. COI, as User:DGG and other fine editors will remind you, is not in and of itself grounds for deletion. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply - But there are sources, such as this one here and here. AVADirect appears to be notable. There products are reviewed in the relevant publications (boutique, consumer and enthusiast). I am not seeing the problem here. Rilak (talk) 03:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Here is a complete list of all 3rd party reviews done on the company. It's sourced off of AVAdirect's website, but all the links are to independent reviewing sources. That should be proof of notability. http://www.avadirect.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=40 --HeatherMTaylor (talk) 20:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * ? Those are links to reviews on some sort of bulletin board maintained by AVA; if these are legit reviews, we need solid links to the third-party sources. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, having looked at some of them, they do link to sites such as CNET (check for a link to the original source within the forum postings). However some of them are not reviews, but rather product information pages maintained by a third party, which serve no purpose. Rilak (talk) 02:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

With OrangeMike's help, the listing should be more in line with Wiki standards. Here are some links to prove notability:

http://reviews.cnet.com/1770-5_7-0.html?query=avadirect&tag=srch

http://reviews.digitaltrends.com/review/5568/ava-direct-gaming-pc-workstation-review

http://g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/gadgetpr0n/66120/AVADirect-Gaming-PC-Review.html

http://computers.toptenreviews.com/gaming-laptops/avadirect-inc/avadirect-inc-avadirect-d901c-reviews-24154.htm

http://overclockershq.com/hardware-reviews/ava-direct-custom-gaming-pc-video-review.html

http://www.crn.com/white-box/199904838

Let me know if you need more information...or different information.--HeatherMTaylor (talk) 10:57, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - I do not see any compelling reason to delete. There are sources about AVADirect and plenty of reviews for their products which mention how notable AVADirect is, although in passing. I think they are sufficient to show that AVADirect is a notable boutique vendor. Rilak (talk) 03:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. and look to cleaning up. As geekly technical this area is, it didn't take long to find a review and |1000036_15660684 more. To those who may be looking to build the article ... it would be nice to include industry or even local media that talk about the company itself. -- Banj e  b oi   18:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Company's products have received some serious reviews and we have other articles on computer manufacturers. --Sloane (talk) 02:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as notable company per later sources supplied by HeatherMTaylor.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:47, 9 March 2009 (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.