Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamillroad Software


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 12:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hamillroad Software

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't find any non-affiliated source for this firm's notability. (Re-post of Hamillroad, speedied earlier today; this version looks cleaner.) Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 22:40, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. The article does not assert notability, and I didn't find substantial coverage in Google news.  Given the niche appeal of its software, notability may be difficult to establish. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment on the above post - http://www.printweek.com/index.cfm?event=page.search&sSearchPhrase=hamillroad significant news coverage if you search in the right place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.132.130 (talk) 19:20, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete -- My impression is that this is a company with three staff members, clearly NN. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Do not delete. Despite Hamillroad Software being a small company, its work is significant and revolutionary in the printing industry, as demonstrated by the awards won at the South African Flexographic Printing Excellence Awards last Wednesday, where its products were awarded Best On Show, two Gold Awards and a Silver Award across two categories. Ltcave 22 September 2013
 * Do not delete. The creator of the Harlequin RIP page thought the company significant enough to warrant two mentions of the company and its products, one of them being the aforementioned product that won the Best On Show awards. As quoted, 'Several third party products add more functionality around the Harlequin Server RIP, including: *Auraia screening from Hamillroad Software – a digitally modulated screening solution claimed to provide the equivalent of very high frequency screens on a wide variety of CtP devices and plates. *FirstProof from Hamillroad Software – providing additional options for soft-proofing of Harlequin raster output.' Ltcave 22 September 2013
 * Notability is not inherited, and being mentioned in another article doesn't mean someone or something deserves their/its own article. Winning awards, maybe. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 18:45, 25 September 2013 (UTC)


 * For your information, Hamillroad's Auraia Screening is currently in testing at several major national newspapers. Ltcave 22 September 2013
 * I would advise not to delete. The company's product supports Harlequin RIP, which is now owned by Global Graphics, a big company with a large number of shares. Hamillroad, which has been around since 2002, seems very influential in its niche, as shown by winning awards. Hamillroad also has numerous press releases and events with which it is involved; the company is notable enough for an article. The article, however, does require checks on neutrality and requires more usage of facts and more references and removal of opinions, so as not to be advertising. No conflicts of interest declared by editor. 01:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I feel I have to respond to the comment "My impression is that this is a company with three staff members, clearly NN", as clearly that does not add to the debate. So what if Hamillroad is a small company? Hewlett-Packard was started by two people, Microsoft was started by one guy, etc... Just because a company is small, doesn't mean it's not doing something revolutionary. Although our FirstPROOF and Lightning TIFF products are not revolutionary (but are good products), our Auraia product most certainly is. It outperforms all existing competitive products from the likes of Kodak (Staccato), Agfa (Sublima), GlobalGraphics (HDS), Esko (Concentric) - and that is NOT my opinion, as we have reports from customer evaluations of the competing technologies where they have proved that (we have superior quality to competitive products, whilst saving more ink than competitive products). Unfortunately, we are not allowed to make those reports public, but if someone wants to mail me and agrees to keep it confidential I can show them. Finally, our Auraia product has won other awards - see http://www.horton.co.nz/?t=12&view=1&newsId=29 where you can see that our first beta site (before we started selling) won newspaper awards on 2011 and 2012. We are now selling this product - it is used in La Voz de Galicia (10th largest newspaper in Spain), Times-Colonist (old newspaper in Canada), StarPress (newspaper in Canada), Sharmans (newspaper in UK), Leopold (commercial packaging in Germany), CrystalMedia (commercial in Australia printing lenticular) and I could go on and on... Acave] 23 September 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.132.130 (talk) 12:00, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Anything that must be kept confidential is of no use to Wikipedia. Quality doesn't matter, notability does, as backed by reliable sources. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 18:45, 25 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:04, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:00, 7 October 2013 (UTC)




 * Delete - even if the reports mentioned above could be made public, in-house competition assessment and customer evaluation won't help much to substantiate WP:CORPDEPTH. I'm not seeing a depth of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Having lots of (even famous) customers does not confer notability. Stalwart 111  08:11, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:34, 9 October 2013 (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.