Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mellanox Technologies


 * 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 delete. causa sui (talk) 16:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Mellanox Technologies

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article originally deleted under A7, then restored by the deleting admin after this discussion Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion. Still a non-notable company though. Yoenit (talk) 23:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable company. Just having a NASDAQ ticker symbol does not constitute notability, although it will give you an artificially-high level of googlehits (which do not constitute substantial coverage). -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  23:44, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I must say this surprises me. I assumed being a publicly traded company constituted being notable? Ottawahitech (talk) 10:14, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, may fall under speedy G11 as well. --  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 04:19, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Unambiguous advertising and vacuous gibberish: a supplier of end-to-end InfiniBand and Ethernet connectivity solutions and services for servers and storage. Mellanox products focus on data center performance and deliver bandwidth, scalability, power conservation and cost-effectiveness while converging multiple legacy network technologies into one future-proof architecture.  I need to future-proof my house.  Maybe aluminum siding will help.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 05:38, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete being  listed on  a sotck  exchange does not confer notability. Even if this company  were to  be notable, the article does not  assert it  and sources do not meet WP:ORG. As it  stands, the article is little more than an advert. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:43, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for providing the link above. Again, I am amazed that publicly traded companies are not automatically considered notable at Wikipedia according to ORG. I would have thought that Wikipidia would be the first place a would-be-investor would look to before buying a company stock. Ottawahitech (talk) 10:22, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete per criteria G11 and G12 (content is copied from the press release used as a reference, ). VQuakr (talk) 05:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you mean G11 as in speedy deletion: CSD_G11? Ottawahitech (talk) 10:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Tagging for speedy deletion as unambiguous copyright violation. No matter how future-proof you are, we can't accept verbatim copies of press releases as articles. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I have been looking around to see who wrote this article in the first place and found out it is a new Wikipedian User_talk:Mkrichards. I was very disheartened to see the way wikipedia welcomed this new potential contributor. The person welcoming spent no more than a second before notifying him/her that their  very first article was nominated for deletion. Ottawahitech (talk) 10:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The welcome and the CSD notification  are placed simultaneously  with  the deletion  process.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Does this mean that those who do not write articles which are nominated for speedy deletion do not get a welcome message? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Practically everyone gets a welcome message from  someone after they  have made a few significant  edits. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:28, 24 October 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.