Talk:SyQuest Technology

WikiProject icon 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

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

Taskforce icon

This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

WikiProject icon Computing Low‐importance

This product line section was wrong in at least one place. I didn't know the details of much of the rest of this so I didn't want to tamper with it, nor did I have a websource other than this bs being mirrored across 50 other websites (such as answers.com, allexperts.com, reference.com, etc.), but there was some incorrect information and I can confirm that SyQuest made two different SQ200 models, one a cartridge and one an external drive housing the SQ5200C, which is also backwards compatible to the SQ200 44mb cartridge. This unit SyQuest made had a 200mb native capacity drives in desktop SCSI cases with the model number SQ200 on the bottom tag, on a second dealer tag, they said "200 MB C" on the front of the drive itself, and the bare drive inside is a SQ5200C. I know this because I have nine identical units. They are not 10mb nor MFM. SQ200 External drives have a 200mb capacity, hence the name!

I noted this weeks before, no one fixed it, so I researched and made the needed changes myself.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.100.174 (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

Anyone got a shot of the disk with something more international to indicate scale? A metric ruler perhaps? I assume that's a US coin of some sort, but not being a USian I can only make a rough estimate of how big the coin is - not very helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Worldwidewookie (talk • contribs) 13:19, 20 October 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

This is not a candidate for speedy deletion. The criteria nominator suggested reads:

G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion.

Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. "Promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organisation, a point of view, etc.

This is a company that was a significant player in the early years of personal computers and so is of historical significance. As the article says, it is no longer in business so it is hard to see what is being promoted. Furthermore the last paragraph is quite critical of the company: "A significant reason for the losses was due to quality issues with a series of products, including the SparQ Drive and SyJet drives, that caused a large number of the drives to malfunction within just a few months of initial operation. ..." This is consistent with a neutral point of view article, but not with advertising. While I started the article, more than 35 editors have contributed to it, again, not consistent with a promotional piece. If you still think deletion is appropriate, AfD is the appropriate forum.--agr (talk) 00:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC) [reply ]