Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vonage (2nd nomination)

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 Speedy Keep as this is a notable nationally and internationally known company with enough sources existing, certainly not AfD material (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 04:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vonage

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable company. Most references are primary sources pointing to the domain of the same corporation. The rest of the sources are passing mentions in news, usual announcements by a corporation, brief announcements of mergers or sales of part of the business. It fails WP:NCORP. Xaxing (talk) 17:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I work for Vonage, so I will not place a vote. But, a few notes: (1) I recognize the article falls short of Wikipedia's content standards, and have been working on some suggestions for improving it. (2) I do not know who in the company is running the LVonage account, but I do not believe they have official authorization, and I do not believe they are complying with Wikipedia's Terms of Use. (3) The various external links they recently added should probably be removed per WP:ELINK. -JHolzapfel (talk) 18:10, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Keep: Honestly, this AfD is pretty absurd. This is a multi-national corporation with extensive coverage in the media. There are at least fifteen to twenty references with comprehensive coverage of Vonage on a variety of topics (more than thirty sources from reliable sources). How does this equate to non-notable?? This clearly meets WP:GNG and WP:CORP. Yes, the article has a lot of problems, but it can be salvaged without a rewrite - I've already made a small variety of changes to help things along a bit. Chrisw80 (talk) 01:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep. Please note that there is some kind of mystery glitch affecting how this AfD is displaying at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 25. Anyway, as Chrisw80 says, it's obviously a notable company. As for the assorted issues with the article, WP:AfD is not cleanup. --Arxiloxos (talk) 03:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it wasn't posted properly. I'm not good enough at handling such things to fix it easily, though. Chrisw80 (talk) 03:54, 26 April 2016 (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.