Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powerset, Inc.
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. Non-admin closure. Jfire (talk) 06:11, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Powerset, Inc.
Delete nn company; the 2 articles do not provide significant coverage - more mentions that venture capitalists are funding competitors for Google and Xerox Parc is in that hunt too. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't intend to create this article. I thought I was editing a pre-existing article that had been deleted. If you poke around in the dustbins of Wikipedia edit history, there have been a couple of articles created about Powerset. They have been deleted because of notability and significance, but those versions were pretty amateurish and lacked references. Even more problematic is that some of them contained language that smacked of hype or marketing. I wanted to create a simple article with objective, verifiable information and references to back it up (a real encyclopedia entry, not a plug for the company). I'll add a few more references, but with three articles form the mainstream press (NY Times, Business Week, and the Washington Post), I think there's a pretty good argument for notability or significance. Stuartprobinson (talk) 21:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 00:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. At least some of the references are reliable sources. --Eastmain (talk) 00:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Clearly, obviously, notable. $12.5 million venture funding, a founder's fund company, starting a new search engine, partner of and located in Xerox Parc? What's not notable about the company? And if you need confirmation there's already a business week article devoted to the company and 1 of two companies profiled in a Washington Post article. If that's not enough, you can use google. Forbes, PC World and Marketwatch not good enough? Wikidemo (talk) 01:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep as there is evidence of notability, per Wikidemo. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 14:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- 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.
