Deletion of Elecom

Comment: I will repeat a bit of what I said about the same user's other nomination of a major Japanese IT corporation article for deletion. First, Elecom is, like I-O Data, listed in the First Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange (which is reserved for large corportations)http://www.nikkei.com/nkd/company/?scode=6750. As  states, the consensus is that public listing by itself is not sufficient to establish notability, "However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion....Editors coming across an article on such a company without such references are encouraged to search (or request that others search) prior to nominating for deletion, given the very high (but not certain) likelihood that a publicly traded company is actually notable according to the primary criterion." A search of Japanese business and IT news sites finds plenty of coverage of both the company and its products: http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGKKZO05249470V20C16A7TJC000/, http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGKKASDZ31I2O_R30C17A3TJ1000/, http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXLASDZ31I2O_R30C17A3TJ1000/, http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXLASHD07H57_X01C16A1000000/, http://business.nikkeibp.co.jp/atcl/report/15/278209/010400013/, http://kaden.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1070183.html, https://www.digimonostation.jp/0000104401/, https://kabutan.jp/news/marketnews/?b=n201704040419, http://www.zaikei.co.jp/article/20130217/124729.html, http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1052573.html, http://k-tai.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/event/mwc2014/637372.html, http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1046300.html, etc
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTED)

Comment: I'm not sure a redirect to that article is correct - which criteria under  do you see as appropriate. If List of Electronic Companies in Japan existed, I would agree that the company should be included in such a list
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Redirect (WP:POFR)

Comment: I do apologize to others for the burden caused by providing so many sources. I just felt that some on this AfD were not looking properly at the sources I provided, so I erred on the side of volume (though not on quality). I am still confused by HighKing's comments. On the one hand, s/he says that none of the online references I provided pass the criteria for establishing notability. I concede that a few are not that good, but HighKing has not responded to my defense of the others. What's odd is that HighKing says s/he is not rejecting the Nikkei when the fact that is exactly what s/he is doing, since five of the online articles I cited are from the Nikkei and its related publications. The argument that these are company press releases remains unfounded and basically calls into question all the corporate news gathering of the major financial paper in Japan (and one of the biggest in the world). I have the feeling HighKing should re-read  because there is a major difference between a website reprinting a corporate press release and an independent and third-party major news organization, with no conflict of interest, providing news coverage of what a corporation is doing. All the newspaper coverage I provided, including the online Nikkei coverage, are independent and significant RS that satisfy . HighKing has not shown they do not, but instead makes unfounded claims that essentially argue that the Nikkei only prints corporate press releases
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:INDEPENDENT||WP:GNG)

Comment: If you could pick three or less references that you believe meet the criteria for establishing notability, you'll find editors are more inclined to look at them. Nevertheless, here's my take on them. The first four are all from the same source (www.nikkei.com) and are all company announcements therefore fails  and . There are also 4 references from impress.co.jp that are likewise all company announcements or material sourced almost exclusively from company sources and therefore fail .  The http://business.nikkeibp.co.jp/atcl/report/15/278209/010400013/ next from nikkeibp.co.jp is likewise a story that almost exclusively sources its content from company material and the CEO and fails  and 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:ORGIND||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND)

Comment: Unremarkable company, fails  and GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: 1. I don't think it is an acceptable argument against notability to argue that someone has provided too many sources. 2.  says "Acceptable sources under this criterion include all types of reliable sources except works carrying merely trivial coverage," and goes on to provide a number of examples of trivial coverage. HighKing seems to go well beyond this when they reject the Nikkei Shimbun. HighKing has themselves said that the BCN award mentioned in Kabutan would establish notability. The full listings of those awards are here (https://www.bcnaward.jp/award/gallery/2017/hard/index.html , https://www.bcnaward.jp/award/gallery/2017/hard/p2.html ) and they appear to be based on the point of sale data for the market share of various products. Many of these are trivial, but some of them are not - for instance (second link), Elecom has the highest market share of sales of computer mice - higher than Logitech
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)