Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IFixit


 * 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.  Sandstein  09:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

IFixit

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete A run-of-the-mill company with no claims to notability. References fails the criteria for establishing notability, are based on quotations/interviews/company announcements/PRIMARY and are not intellectually independent and fail WP:ORGIND and WP:CORPDEPTH. Topic fails GNG and WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 12:35, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:45, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:45, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - Meets general notability guidelines. Referenced often in textbooks and academic papers. Icco (talk) 20:17, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - This article has been rated as ‘mid-importance' on the WikiProject Environment's importance scale and has recent activity. While the article could use improvement, this company has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. This month, iFixit was discussed in India Today, PC Magazine, NPR Marketplace, and Ars Technica.

Several of the primary sources in the article could be replaced with secondary sources to corroborate facts and establish the importance of iFixit in the electronics industry.

This page exists in six other languages. The German language page, in particular, has extensive sourcing that could be incorporated in the English article. Potifer7 (talk) 22:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

PAGE ]]) 22:21, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep iFixit is widely cited by news outlets that are considered to be reliable sources. I would go and seek out examples, but the ones given by previous !voters should be sufficient. --Ahecht ([[User_talk:Ahecht|TALK
 * Keep Trickier than I originally thought, as nearly all coverage is of their teardown reports. Still, whenever they do a new teardown, it is immediately "reported" on widely, which suggests notability.  We don't need to rely on that, as there is direct coverage of the site, such as this motherboard story or this from Bloomberg. ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 01:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep-Per above.... ~ Winged Blades Godric 07:42, 12 June 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.