Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azoteq


 * 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. Drmies (talk) 04:41, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Azoteq

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Does not appear to be a notable company. News archive results are rehashes of the company's own press release, no genuine third-party coverage found. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 07:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The following, a related contested prod, belongs here.

--  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 16:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC) 
 * Delete both. Appears to be an attempt to use Wikipedia as the company's catalog.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:25, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 01:42, 27 April 2012 (UTC)




 * DeleteIt seems to fit aspects of this guideline. The ProxSense article certainly reads like a catalog. Both appear non-notable. Stormbay (talk) 00:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep I added ProxSense because of how Atmel's page was structured. When I originally wrote Azoteq, it was tagged with needing more links and information. So I wrote in more information and linked Azoteq to Capacitive Touch Technologies. Azoteq also has publications other than self press releases being distributed. Tingyo (Talk) 15:52, 2 May 2012 (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.