Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wowza Media Systems

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 delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wowza Media Systems

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

Insufficient support of notability for this company through secondary sources. Current sources on the page are from the company's own website, press or PR releases, or material from blogs (and not news blogs). A search of news articles revealed only press releases, product announcements, and merger announcements. In other words, there does not appear to be anything beyond routine coverage for companies. I recommend deletion. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 05:30, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Google News found several results but, as mentioned, several of the sources are either insufficient or press releases rather than independent significant coverage. Google News archives provided additional results but several of them are press releases which is concerning, suggesting that this company has produced probably 98 (possibly leaning to 99) percent of any links. Although some of these press releases may be detailed, they would read like an advertisement thus inappropriate. One of the results here mentions one of the company's products but slightly reads like an advertisement. Unfortunately, the second page of Google News archives results continues with additional press releases, ugh. Google Books provided one result here that briefly mentions the company and focuses more with the product itself, there is another mention of the product here. Surprisingly, there is a German result here which appears to be another small mention. SwisterTwister talk 06:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:05, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:05, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative Oppose: I agree that there is not much 3rd party coverage out there about this company, but they are a big player in the live-streaming game. Their main product, Wowza Media Server (at least as of 6 months ago) powered the biggest and fastest growing company in this area, twitch.tv. I'm not too surprised that the news is about the company using the technology, not the company developing it. I don't think it hurts to keep this article for a while, maybe 6 months to a year or so, to see whether the news reports come around. Also, as there is a Wowza Media Server article, I think an exception can be made for the company behind it. jheiv ^{talk contribs} 22:02, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would normally not object to incubating the article, but given that six months have passed already, I would have expected some coverage to start emerging by now. Also, the article for the product has three press releases for its sources and the other sounds suspiciously like a routine product announcement. Even if the product was notable, the producing company needs its own coverage. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 06:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ^{(have a chat)} 02:29, 11 October 2012 (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.