This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mwtoews (talk | contribs) at 18:02, 22 August 2007 (+with merge). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:02, 22 August 2007 by Mwtoews (talk | contribs) (+with merge)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)TILE64
Delete nn product from a nn company; fails WP:CORP and WP:N Carlossuarez46 01:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete It is impossible to verify the contents of this article from reliable third-party sources. A quick google search also provides very few hits for this product as well. --Siva1979 02:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep This Processor is all over the Technology News, and noted by several large Hardware Companies. -- Jimmi Hugh 02:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep and improve. They're cited in Slashdot and Ars Technica. Not so sure about slashdot, but Ars should pass WP:RS. --Bfigura 03:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Keepmeets notability. Carlosguitar 04:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep, definitely notable.
- Tilera creativity to do a 64 core processor while Intel and AMD only did 4 core until today, makes more than notable, but also part of computing history. Carlosguitar 12:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per above. Jakew 12:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Mhocker 13:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Merge with Tilera as only product at this time. Tilera is not notable except for the TILE64. Later on we can split them which is nicer than deleting both articles now.Ttiotsw 14:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Public information on this chip became available on 8/20. Today, one day later, Google News returns more than ten independent articles from well-known sources on this processor. This clearly meets wp:n. Gavin 03:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per above. --Patrik Hägglund 06:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, although I wouldn't mind a Merge with Tilera for now. +mt 18:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)