Talk:BrainChip

references

@Blaze Wolf: @97198: secondary references have been added numbers 1,2,3,7,9,11, 13-26. 66.37.239.34 (talk) 19:39, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

other Draft: BrainChip

@Diannaa: how would you like me to take the previously deleted draft into account for this article? 66.37.239.34 (talk) 16:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't think you should be copying from there, because the old draft contained a lot of copyvio. — Diannaa (talk) 16:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to; I can't even Access the old draft. 66.37.239.34 (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Diannaa:I've run the article through a plagiarism checker and made changes. Would you mind accepting this draft? 66.37.239.34 (talk) 19:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't review drafts. Please wait in the queue. — Diannaa (talk) 21:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft Declined

@Tails Wx: could you provide some instruction on what is necessary for this article to be accept worthy? Birdmanoftech (talk) 04:36, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Some parts are unsourced, especially the "AKD processor" section. Tails Wx 04:40, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tails Wx: such parts are unsourced because other reviewers have been consistently telling me to reduce the number of references to BrainChip publications (and "affiliated" agency publications) including the data page about the AKD processor. I seem to be having significant difficulty navigating the complex rules of writing on Wikipedia. Birdmanoftech (talk) 04:45, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

This? It's because it was copied content from a deleted draft. Tails Wx 04:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

that was not what I was referring to nor was that copying from the draft I had not known existed. Birdmanoftech (talk) 04:51, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Which diff, then? I can't explain to you about "other reviewers have been consistently telling me to reduce the number of references" without diffs. Additionally, skimming through the references, I don't see in depth coverage of BrainChip in some sources. Not all, but some. Tails Wx 04:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I apologize if this is a stupid question, but what does "diff" mean. Is it "different"? Birdmanoftech (talk) 04:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Close. See Help:Diff. Tails Wx 04:58, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

ah thank you. some of the more recent diffs under Birdmanoftech are deleting references because I talked with some editors about how to make the article worthy and they said that any references from BrainChip or Brainchip partners or news publications that had even a slight connection with the company were not to be used. Birdmanoftech (talk) 05:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Probably this one. What about reading WP:COI, WP:PATENTS, and WP:PRIMARY? Pinging Pavlor. Tails Wx 05:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

The patents are not supporting anything, just there for the readers benefit and I don't understand why you added COI. Birdmanoftech (talk) 05:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Myself, I would select 3 best sources and write an article based mainly on them - with limited use of other reliable sources (eg. passing mentions only) to fill some missing details. This way, you would see, if you are even able to write an acceptable article: you need multiple reliable sources with broad enough coverage of the article subject (passing mentions or lone paragraph aren't enough). Note my experience with the AfC process is limited, I write mostly about computer history related subjects, where are next to none of the usual issues of the company articles (promotion, COI, churnalism...). Take my comments as a general observation and follow instructions of the AfC reviewers. In the end, the company may be not notable yet for an article. Pavlor (talk) 08:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I would remove all patents and remove the Brainchip webpage, similarly to the suggestion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing. Tails Wx 13:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I have removed primary sources and found a few new sources to replace them. How does it look now? Birdmanoftech (talk) 15:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

How about using some of the external links as references as well? Tails Wx 16:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I have now used some of them but the rest I think don't count as secondary sources. Birdmanoftech (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I've added a few. I'll leave it up to another AfC reviewer, there is a re-submit button if you would like to re-submit. Tails Wx 17:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

thank you Birdmanoftech (talk) 17:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: can you explain what parts of it sound like an advertisement?

Notability sources

These three are from well-known organizations and have significant coverage of BrainChip.

"Company Announcements". The Motley Fool Australia. Archived from the original on 2023-01-11. Retrieved 2023-01-11.

"BrainChip makes strong ASX debut". The West Australian. 2015-09-22. Archived from the original on 2020-10-19. Retrieved 2020-10-18.

NASA SBIR 2020-I Solicitation | H6.22-4509 - CNN RNN Processor | Proposal Summary Archived 2022-01-21 at the Wayback Machine Birdmanoftech (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kvng: Birdmanoftech (talk) 16:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

The middle one is the best source listed here but it lacks a byline so could be criticized as having been derived from a press release with little editorial control. The first looks like an actual press release. The last is some sort of a proposal from one of Brainchip's customers, not a reliable source ~Kvng (talk) 03:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Are these acceptable? The publishers are not well known but they all have a byline.

Pascu, | Luana (February 13, 2020). "BrainChip showcases Akida neural processing capabilities, opens developer environment | Biometric Update". www.biometricupdate.com. Archived from the original on May 26, 2022. Retrieved January 15, 2023.

Clarke, Peter (December 18, 2017). "BrainChip founder to focus on 'Akida' chip". Archived from the original on January 11, 2023. Retrieved January 11, 2023. Birdmanoftech (talk) 05:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kvng: Birdmanoftech (talk) 19:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

This makes it a marginal case. I have accepted the draft. There is a reasonable chance someone will be successful at deleting it. ~Kvng (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Have now also added two articles from EETimes:

"BrainChip Launches Event-Domain AI Inference Dev Kits".

"SiFive and BrainChip Partner to Demo IP Compatibility". Birdmanoftech (talk) 04:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Penny stock premotion

This article is nothing more than an attempt to promote an obscure Australian penny stock with two dozen employees. Brainchip shareholders have discussed creating a Wiki article multiple times on HotCopper an Australian website primarily devoted to discussing small cap stocks. Brainchip has no commercial products and negligible revenue (far less than $1M pa). BrisV (talk) 17:31, 21 August 2023 (UTC)