Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hillcrest Labs


 * 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   speedy keep. Nomination was withdrawn  DGG ( talk ) 05:50, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Hillcrest Labs

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable company. Tinton5 (talk) 07:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Hillcrest Labs invented a new technology that is changing the way people use television. According to Wikipedia's policy on notability, "A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources." Hillcrest Labs has received significant coverage for its technology in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and many other influential publications, as cited in the article. The company has also won multiple awards for its technology. There is no evidence to support the claim of non-notability.Accurastic (talk) 13:44, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: IMHO, a very sloppy nomination. The first two references cited are substantial articles, about the subject, from the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal respectively; that's all that's needed to hit the GNG, and no one would need to look over the substantial article about the subject from PC Magazine, for instance.  Did the nom even attempt to look at the sources present in the article at the time he filed the AfD?  The article is certainly written in a promotional fashion and could definitely stand to be rewritten in an encyclopedic style, but that's a content problem more properly handled on the article's talk page.  A WP:BEFORE issue if ever I saw one.  Ravenswing  06:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep – Topic is passing WP:GNG per, , , and many more references already in the article. Northamerica1000 (talk) 19:44, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Someone has looked through the hundreds of Google news archive results and found some reliable sources that give it significant coverage.  D r e a m Focus  01:28, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Many reliable sources are now included in the inline citations. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable article. Why was this nominated? Gioto (talk) 04:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Change vote to keep. Article is well sourced now and notability is fully established. Withdraw this nomination, per WP:Snow. Tinton5 (talk) 08:15, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Very notable company that made an innovative product, many reliable, indenpendent sources. --Madison-chan (talk) 00:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep notability established it appears, sources are ample. JORGENEV  07:01, 16 November 2011 (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.