Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FairCom Corporation


 * 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. I'm assuming User:Mongodbfan is a sock. Ignoring that, we're left with unanimous (if poorly attended) consensus to delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

FairCom Corporation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I find virtually no applicable coverage in independent sources meeting WP:N. Largoplazo (talk) 22:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. KCVelaga (talk) 01:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. KCVelaga (talk) 01:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I disagree. Business insider and Engineering.com are legitimate sources base upon WP:N. It is obvious that who ever created the page is a novice, but from what I can tell, the content is accurate and is not promotional. It is just stating facts. Also, FairCom is company that has been around for more than 35 years, which demonstrates it is a significant entity. TexasTerror (talk)
 * Note this editor has been blocked for abusing multiple accounts per Sockpuppet investigations/TexasTerror.--SamHolt6 (talk) 02:35, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:38, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

FairCom Corporation is one of the oldest database technology companies in existence. It may be small, but it used by major companies such as Verizon, Visa, UPS and Rockwell Automation. The page should not be deleted.BubbaBexley (talk) 21:06, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note this editor has been blocked for abusing multiple accounts per Sockpuppet investigations/TexasTerror.--SamHolt6 (talk) 02:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - conferring with the nominator, and adding that the subject company seems to fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Mentions-in-passing, as the majority of the sources are, do not confer notability per NCORP, and the one quality source (the Engineering.com article) contains some primary content and is written in a speculative tone. In short, the sources cited do not demonstrate adequate notability.--SamHolt6 (talk) 19:20, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * KEEP - People in the IT industry and enterprise-level-company management use the Gartner Magic Quadrant as the go-to-source when evaluating companies and IT products. If FairCom is in the Gartner Magic Quadrant, which it is/was, it is a relevant company. If the company is guilty of anything, it is poor marketing for nearly 40 years. Also, recent news about a new partnership with PTC and its contract with Verizon are other examples that the company is relevant in the database market. DatabaseMaster (talk) 19:06, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Struck sock vote, per Sockpuppet investigations/TexasTerror.--SamHolt6 (talk) 02:35, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


 * KEEP - FairCom’s c-tree was one of the first databases to hit the market in the 80s. I find that the sources meet the necessary Wikipedia criteria. Mongodbfan (talk) 01:11, 14 November 2018 (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.