Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NZXT Corp.


 * 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   no consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

NZXT Corp.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:ORG. Not notable, lacks in-depth coverage and not listed.  Cheers AKS  17:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. (To be honest, I built a computer with an NZXT case that I'm currently using at home!) The first reference is only a review, doesn't tell about the company; the other two references are from the NZXT site itself. "Products" section look like an advertisement to me. I'm sorry to say, but this article isn't noteworthy enough to be on Wikipedia. --みんな空の下 (トーク) 17:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * How is it an advertisement? The article says they are low end but have been trying to move into the high end of the market, hardly an advertisement! Dlpkbr (talk) 03:41, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Can you two explain why you think NZXT's article should be deleted, but Lian Li's ; Thermaltake's; Zalman's; Antec's and Cooler Master's articles shouldn't? All of these articles rely on sources from the company or cite statements from review sites. If you remove this one, you should remove all of them.


 * Plus its not like you couldn't just add these instead of going to the extreme level of deleting it: AdvertNotability Dlpkbr (talk) 03:31, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Also reviews in Maximum PC, and PC Mag for their products. This was done with a quick search.  I would expect a more conderted search can find even more sources to support notability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:21, 12 January 2014 (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.