On 30/09/2007, Bryan Derksen
<bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
I undeleted it and reformatted the article so
that it _looked_ "more
complete" - gave it a references section and an inline reference to that
news article, added some pointless wikilinks, and mentioned one of their
products (though the product itself doesn't have a Wikipedia page). That
seems to have been sufficient for it to be kept this time.
So you turned a substub into a stub? It is to be expected that that
would improve it's survival chances.
Not really, I just prettied it up a bit. IMO anyway - I've never been
clear on the substub/stub distinction, or why substubs are bad and stubs
are good.