Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xiaomi Mi Pad


 * 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. Commentary since the DRV is strongly for keeping and is supported with solid sources. RL0919 (talk) 22:47, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Xiaomi Mi Pad

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Wikipedia isn't a hosting service. This product isn't notable and it only serves to mirror what's on phonearena, and it's best such thing remains on resources where it's a better fit. Wikipedia isn't a product catalog. Graywalls (talk) 11:24, 15 November 2019 (UTC) - just commenting to affirm I'm maintaining my position. A lot of added sources are things that are typical of review oriented websites that writes reviews on just about every consumer electronics out there and I still don't feel that this product is particularly notable. Graywalls (talk) 10:50, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 11:24, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 11:24, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 10:47, 13 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete I can't see anything to distinguish this from a plethora of similar tablets. Existence is not notability. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:53, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fifthavenuebrands (talk) 12:57, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete — Per nomination. Centre Left Right  ✉ 19:47, 15 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep
 * The tablet is actually one of the first 2 tablets that use Nvidia Tegra K1 Processor (besides the tablet from nVidia).
 * It is also the first tablet from Xiaomi.
 * Due to its good price-performance ratio, it has a large userbase (hint from xda device website views)
 * Also it seems to be important part of Company History (now being "purged" from Official Sources)
 * Above keep by 0xSkyy (talk) 03:13, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I have also updated the article with more relevant information. To find more information about the device, it is advisable to limit (google) search to January 2013 to January 2015 range.


 * Also, whereas MiPad 2,3,4 ... should (probably) not have separate Wikipedia pages, MiPad (original) should, as it is part of company history.


 * Andy Dingley, actually, now it may seem indistinguishable, but at the time of its release, it was quite the Apple 2, it had Hardware Spec comparable to gaming console, with super low price. Care to comment.
 * Also pinging Centre Left Right  and Fifthavenuebrands
 * 0xSkyy (talk) 22:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Leaning delete, but 0xSkyy has added some references to the article, and more input would beneficial.
 * Comment WP:PRODUCTREV says, "other (e.g. new tech gadgets, travel blogs) are newer and more prone to manipulation by marketing and public relations personnel.". Practically every phone gets reviewed, so if product pages are written entirely on reviews, that means just about every cell phone would be on here and the problem I am seeing is Wikipedia acting practically as a mirror of phonearena.  And eurogamers.net has a disclaimer on the bottom "Sometimes we include links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.", so it could be seen that it's in their advantage to review favorably when possible. Could we consider it truly independent? Graywalls (talk) 01:03, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ST47 (talk) 14:27, 22 November 2019 (UTC) because in terms of notability, this MiPad comment by 0xSkyy (talk) 23:54, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Graywalls So you want to delete Apple 2, ipad, nexus 7, nexus 7 (2012), nexus 7 (2013) ...?
 * 1) Was the FIRST tablet to use Nvidia Tegra K1 processor,
 * 2) Was the FIRST tablet from Xiaomi in a line of tablets.
 * 3) Had highly competitive pricing (240USD)(read: extremely low price) for the hardware it used. Nexus 9 ($399) & Nvidia Shield Tablet($399) (both Tegra K1 devices) (both around 8 inch tablet)
 * comment
 * That's not how notability is defined here. See WP:PRODUCT and WP:GNG guidelines.
 * 1 and 2) ok? For example, suppose a product was the first of the kind to have some arbitrary attribute. For example, offering tomato flavored ice cream. This simple fact wouldn't make it notable unless there's a lot of press coverage about it.


 * 3 companies and businesses do loss leaders and door busters all the time in order to get the branding out there for promotional, marketing and public relations purposes and it don't mean a thing. Graywalls (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment Actually performance is a significant attribute for any computing device, for which this device DID get coverage in the "press". (Article updated with references)
 * 3.) By your logic Graywalls So you want to delete Apple 2, ipad, nexus 7, nexus 7 (2012), nexus 7 (2013) ...?
 * comment by 0xSkyy (talk) 01:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Comment:ST47, Kindly remove the delete notice from the main article, as (hopefully) the original reason (lack of sources) is no longer valid. Thanks. (As several 3rd party (&) news sources have been added) 0xSkyy (talk) 02:37, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No, the notice will remain until this discussion is concluded. And I am leaning towards deletion at this time, I would have deleted the article yesterday but wanted to give other users the opportunity to respond to the references which you have added. ST47 (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Polling is not a substitute for discussion,

Original Reason for deletion Find sources: "Xiaomi Mi Pad" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR does not seem valid any longer, external sources are now cited which cover the topic, with sources including: and others... have been added, please check the article again. 0xSkyy (talk) 03:08, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) The Verge
 * 2) Reuters
 * 3) Ars Technica
 * 4) PC Magazine
 * 5) Washington Post
 * 6) Mashable
 * 7) Cnet
 * 8) Eurogamer
 * 9) Digit_(magazine)
 * 10) AnandTech
 * 11) Time (magazine)
 * I don't understand what you think you have proven. Your work to improve the article is absolutely appreciated. This debate will remain open for another 7 days from when I relisted it, at which point the consensus will be re-evaluated either by me or by another admin. ST47 (talk) 04:50, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisted per Deletion review/Log/2019 December 1.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep – (from DRV) The product meets WP:GNG and WP:NPRODUCT by virtue of these WP:THREE: PCMag, Time, and CNET, and there are others like Verge and Engadget. (The reviews appear to meet WP:PRODUCTREV.) Additionally, per NPRODUCT and WP:PAGEDECIDE, merging this product article with the article on the company would make the article on the company too large, and potentially create an WP:UNDUE problem. So, I think this product is best covered in a stand-alone article. Thanks to 0xSkyy for the WP:HEY. – Levivich 19:40, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Levivich just above. Pretty clearly meets the GNG, which I think should be sufficient. Much improved since AfD nomination, added sources look good. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep (2 or again): Agree with above comments on notability satisfaction WP:GNG & on WP:NPRODUCT. Plus an optional 4th 😊 for WP:THREE : Reuters 0xSkyy (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Please DO NOT !Vote more than once. You already casted "keep" once. Graywalls (talk) 00:31, 13 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - notifying Deletion Review participants who have endorsed the deletion who have not participated after this was relisted; and users who have casted !vote = delete just in case they want to make comments. Graywalls (talk) 00:41, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Still delete  Why are we being asked to !vote a third time, with this nonsense of "discard the old !votes we didn't like last time". Andy Dingley (talk) 00:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * keep a major product. We wouldn't keeep all variations, but this sseeems to be a suitable base article for them.  DGG ( talk ) 11:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Improvements in sourcing and content since the start of the AfD show this product to be covered in multiple RS and thus to be notable per WP:GNG. The article isn't perfect, but has WP:SURMOUNTABLE problems that can be fixed with editing. Hence, keep. -- 13:02, 16 December 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.