Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dolphin Interconnect Solutions

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. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 04:55, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dolphin Interconnect Solutions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. No references. Imcdc (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Imcdc (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Imcdc (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Imcdc (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Imcdc (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: A longstanding unreferenced article to which more unreferenced product information has been added by IPs on a couple of occasions. The basic facts about the company origins can be verified: I added a couple of references. As to whether it is worth preserving (see the Talk page discussion from 2003), that remains open. AllyD (talk) 11:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as non-notable with a promotional odor. --Lockley (talk) 20:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep was WP:BEFORE done? There's sources, some added passing WP:GNG. WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP - this should be stubbed, promo removed and the overly detailed product info reduced down to basics. Widefox; talk 22:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep indeed, Imdc should have at least made some effort to find sources, there are quite a few for a company around so long. The article did need to be rewritten a bit from the usual product guide; it looks better so far. I prefer a historical narrative for a subject which has lasted so long. W Nowicki (talk) 21:34, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:HEY. Improvements to the article seem to meet WP:NCORP. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.