Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Media Temple
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Keep--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 13:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Media Temple (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This is a procedural nomination on my part, I think the person who added PROD template was trying to send to Afd - PROD template was also removed by article creator who I think is objecting to deletion. There do seem to be some notability concerns and references appear to be mainly to companies own site. See Talk:Media Temple for other users comments. Now removed, particpants have commented here. Hunting dog (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep - the reflist contains sufficient reliable secondary sources to meet the requirements of [{WP:CORP]]. The claim to notability is as a pioneer of grid-hosting, as outlined in one of the sources attached and now included in the lead. It's not exactly Microsoft but there is reasonable coverage in several industry media outlets and a moderately impressive client list. The size of the company and number of employees is not a benchmark for inclusion or otherwise. I've copyedited it a little to remove some obvious advertising but though it needs more work I think it might just make the grade. Euryalus (talk) 11:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I can't see any reliable sencondary sources which meet the req. of [[WP:CORP}]. Media Temple Inc. cannot be a pioneer in Grid hosting because grid computing and hosting is well known since 1999 (cf. I. Foster, C. Kesselman, The Grid: Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure, 1999).The article contains a lot of advertising and external links to its own company website. Yes, Hunting dog is right, the person who added PROD template was trying to sent to AfD and of course the article creator has deleted the PROD template in bad faith. Mediatemple (talk) 13:34, 6 August 2008 (CET)
- Comment - To note I didn't say there was any bad faith on the part of the creator, in fact I tried to explain on user talk page that creator (or any other editor) is entitled to remove a WP:Proposed Deletion tag, if he/she disagrees with deletion. This process has different procedures and templates, the templates for this process are the ones which should not be removed. -Hunting dog (talk) 14:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Thanks to User:Mediatemple for the comments above. A couple of points - JediLofty points out the relevant secondary sources below. The claim of being a pioneer in grid-hosting is directly referenced from one of those articles. The reference above to a 1999 book on grid-hosting doesn't of itself invalidate the secondary source describing them as a pioneer of the concept, as Media Temple itself has existed since 1998. Lastly, the article did indeed contain a lot of advertising - a fair bit has been removed over the course of this AfD and hopefully the article is in better shape. Advertising in an otherwise notable article would seem to be better addressed by editing it out rather than deleting the entire page. Euryalus (talk) 02:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Thanks to User:Euryalus for his comments about Grid Computing. My opinion is, that the reference above to a 1999 book on grid-hosting does of itself invalidate the secondary source describing them as a pioneer of the concept, as Media Temple itself has startet this service (GS) in October 2007. Mediatemple 09:497, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - while most of the references in the article are primary sources, there are a few that meet the requirements (Netcraft's page about them as well as a mention by Inc.com and TechCrunch). -- JediLofty UserTalk 12:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Deletebecause most references are primary ones. Their is no reliable secondary source given, which could verify the content of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.71.12.92 (talk) 13:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I've struck through the above vote which appears to be from same user as below. Please only leave one !vote each and please see also Wikipedia:Vote#Deletion.2C_moving_and_featuring -Hunting dog (talk) 14:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete - Given secondary sources, which only verify Media Temple's GS outages, are not good reasons for keeping this article in the Wikipedia. Additionally the article is almost a stub. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.71.12.92 (talk) 13:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Indented as suspicion raised at SSP on whether this IP is used to votestack OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've now struck through the above vote as User:Mediatemple confirms it is his/her IP account here and he/she has already !voted above. Euryalus (talk) 10:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Indented as suspicion raised at SSP on whether this IP is used to votestack OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - As the creator of this article, I would like to add that it was not intended to be used as advertising. I am not affiliated with the company in any way and if I was, I don't think I would have added in the criticism section. If the article had no references whatsoever, then I could understand why it would be an obvious candidate for deletion, but this is not the case. Although several were from the company itself (a number to illustrate the criticism), I think there were adequate third party sources. If references need to be improved, then deleting the article outright is hardly the answer. Toytown Mafia (talk) 16:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Hosts several high-profile sites and has 445 hits on Google News which suggests notability -Halo (talk) 23:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The number of Google or Google News hits are not good criteria for notability. As you might know, Google results are 99% Spam. Not all Media Temple hits in Google are about the Media Temple Inc. in discussion. A lot of them are hits for Mediatemple ® GBR in Germany (see mediatemple.eu), another Hosting company Mediatemple (talk) 10:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Another Comment I've found another Hosting Company, which called Media Temple Inc. It's from India (see mediatemple.in) and a lot of Google hits about them.
- Delete. Tech Crunch is a Media Temple client, so not 'independent' per WP:CORP. All hits I've checked, including Netcraft and Inc. mag trace back to press releases or other information directly from Media Temple and/or are not primarily about Media Temple, it just is one of multiple companies mentioned. Just another webhoster with a proficient PR department. Shawisland (talk) 00:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Copy that All links and google hits are not independent. It's mostly self-advertising b Media Temple Inc. and PR of dependent customer-sites. Mediatemple (talk) 08:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.