Talk:Neterion

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

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Notability[edit]

Hi User:Hughesdarren! I saw that you tagged this with the notability template. I agree that this is probably not a highly influential firm, but with 6 sources providing coverage of this company, I think WP:NCORP is met. Thoughts? Actualcpscm (talk) 09:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there @Actualcpscm: The five references are good (1 and 3 are the same?), none were in any depth about Neterion, the first three were about the predecessor and they all read like like passing mentions to me. I wasn't prepared to commit to reviewing it through to the mainspace just yet and put the tags on so it is in my watchlist to check on later. You can remove the tag if you like, another reviewer might send it through as is. Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 09:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think coverage of its predecesssor is relevant with regards to notability, as it was basically just a rebrand (and not a corporate restructuring or acquisition). I disagree with your evaluation of notability on this, but I won't remove the tag; it's a very legitimate concern. Thanks for taking the time to reply! Actualcpscm (talk) 09:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process[edit]

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Hi again! I rewrote this article to remove original research and include relevant information from reliable sources. I don't expect it to grow beyond a stub, but that's fine. Happy editing!

Actualcpscm (talk) 09:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]