Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foxit

Foxit

Foxit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No indication of notability; the only reference in the article is self-published. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:54, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

• Weak Delete There are a couple of articles in Chinese that mention the company ([1] and [2]). This first seems press release-y. The second one also seems somewhat like a press release, though it discusses some kind of award for one of their products, Foxit Reader, but I'm not sure that it's a particularly important award. There is a listing from MBDA showing the company won an award for being a "Minority Global Technology Firm" award-- though it tied with another organization. I might be inclined to support keeping the article if there is some more substantial coverage of the company itself. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 23:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

• Strong Keep Their product Foxit Reader is fairly well known. Here are some articles in Chinese on Foxit, in addition to what user (I JethroBT) provided. [3] [4] [5] [6]. Note that the first 3 is about the central Chinese government choosing Foxit software as the designated pdf software provider. The 4th is like a press release, but it also corroborates the fact that the Chinese government procured Foxit Reader from Foxit software. Note that the 3rd one is from Xinhua, the official mouthpiece of the Chinese government. Too bad that the Xinhua website is down for me, so I couldn't get the article, only the google cached version.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.199.240.133 (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
• Delete. No evidence of notability. Coretheapple (talk) 16:56, 2 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, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 03:02, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

---

• Keep - Satisfies WP:GNG with these articles that represent significant coverage from independent and seemingly reliable sources (if someone wants to call them not-reliable, they'll need to back that up): [7][8][9][10]. "No indication of notability" isn't a reason for deletion at WP:AFD which has been clearly explained at WP:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Simply doing a Google News search for Foxit produced all of these articles. Maybe these references can be disputed when it comes to establishing notability but did any delete !votes even check before !voting? These were as easy to find as it comes. If you found no references, it helps the discussion to show what searches you did that resulted in no references. Otherwise, your !vote is baseless and not very useful. OlYeller21^Talktome 05:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)