Talk:Sandstorm Enterprises

This article was nominated for deletion on 2006 October 3. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Computer Security: Computing Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer Security, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer security on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer SecurityWikipedia:WikiProject Computer SecurityTemplate:WikiProject Computer SecurityComputer Security articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).

Things you can help WikiProject Computer Security with:

Article alerts will be generated shortly by AAlertBot. Please allow some days for processing. More information...

Review importance and quality of existing articles
Identify categories related to Computer Security
Tag related articles
Identify articles for creation (see also: Article requests)
Identify articles for improvement
Create the Project Navigation Box including lists of adopted articles, requested articles, reviewed articles, etc.
Find editors who have shown interest in this subject and ask them to take a look here.

Untitled

I'll improve information on the page.

Sandstorm is notable because it had the first multi-line war dialer, holds the patent on multi-line war dialing. Wikipedia has an article about war dialing, and this is a cross link.

Let's not delete this page

I think that we've done a fair job improving the content of this page so that it now meets Wikipedia standards. 140.247.62.201 15:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Notability and Unrerenced tags

I removed the Notability and Unreferenced tags because:

Sandstorm is notable with all of those patents.
There are references at the end of the article.

Simsong 06:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Worst AfD ever

"I found reviews of their products on BusinessWire" --- funny, that. BusinessWire is a venue for press releases.

The notability of company founders does not confer notability on the company itself; a company is notable when writers in reliable sources verify an assertion of notability.

Patents do not imply notability. Jeepers. Anybody can get a patent (including, for the record, me); they are a simple function of money and time. A patent can itself be notable, and a company commercializing a notable patent can therefore itself be notable (if that commercialization is remarked about in reliable sources), but there are some stupid and terrible patents out there, along with a raft of utterly irrelevant ones.

Coupled with the WP:COI issues with this page, I think we should revisit AfD. Takers?

--- tqbf 20:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there has to be some references to it to show the notability--it is not self-evident.--there ought to be, besides BWire--there are dozens of relevant reputable trade magazines in this field. DGG (talk) 20:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly object to the notion of sourcing an article with an op-ed written by the founder of the company. Am I off-base there? --- tqbf 20:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD will lose :(

This company got written in up 1998 in Wired: here's the article. If anyone is paying attention to the AfD, it'll get a "keep" for this; it's sad, because there's not much notable here.

The cut-down article is at least less puff-y than it was prior.

WP's vulnerability to PR --- even badly orchestrated PR --- from tech companies is a real problem. A topic for a different talk page.

--- tqbf 20:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]