Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReMarkable


 * 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. Meets WP:SK#1: Withdrawn by nominator, no other delete arguments (non-admin closure)  C Thomas3   (talk) 09:42, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

ReMarkable

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Company fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Its product, the tablet, may be notable, and the article is actually a confusing mix of the two topics, but frankly outside infobox it's close to a WP:TNT mess. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:09, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep.   Well-sourced stub.  The in depth sources now include: Business Insider, Laptop Magazine, Digital Trends, Popular Mechanics, Gizmodo, and others.  Very, very clearly meets and exceeds WP:GNG.  The article includes both content on the company and on its namesake products.  Could separation/detail between either be improved, sure!, all articles have room for improvement.  But deletion is not rewrite, so keep it!  XavierItzm (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You are still missing the point - their tablet may be notable, but the company is not. The sources you mention review the tablet, not the company. If you or anyone else wants to rewrite it as a tablet article, I'll likely withdraw this. But the article, currently, is about the company (with tablet info thrown in), and the company fails at notability. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:00, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Nah, unfortunately, it is you who is misunderstanding policy. Deletion is not improvement.  You could have moved the article or you could have re-structured the article, which, granted, like all Wikipedia entries, has room for improvement.  Yet you insist on deleting an article which clearly passes the WP:GNG, based on massive WP:DEPTH coverage by numerous WP:RS.  Not cool.  XavierItzm (talk) 18:08, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I have little love lost for spam. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:59, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I did quick and dirty rewrite changing article subject from the company to its product. The article seems to be still somewhat promotional, but notability should not be an issue now (eg. I found this review in the German ct magazine: and another quite big review on golem.de ). Pavlor (talk) 05:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn. Rewrite by Pavlor addresses the issue. Thank you. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:36, 11 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Propose that the result ought to be:

The result was speedy keep. Per WP:SK, the nominator withdrew the nomination, and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted or redirected.
 * cheers, XavierItzm (talk) 07:22, 11 June 2019 (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.