Talk:EBOX

This article was nominated for deletion on January 9, 2018. The result of the discussion was delete.

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

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

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

Telecommunications Low‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications 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.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

CSD Invalid

Apologies for the CSD error- there are multiple parts of the article that follow NPOV, and I am fairly inexperienced at AfD, so sorry for this mistake. Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 01:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for your work. I marked it as reviewed (with wp:notability being the main question, and did that based on sources. But this article has pretty severe problems. The articles reads like it's build from press release material / self-descriptions by EBOX rather than from secondary / independent sources. My suggestion is condens the curent material down to about 1/2 and the find / read / include independent sources and build much material from those. Happy editing!.

North8000 (talk) 01:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]