Talk:EdgeCast Networks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In response to the comment below I'll just repeat what I said before: I am the author of this entry and I feel it is notable and should not be deleted because it meets the General Notability Guidline's main criteria i.e. "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." EdgeCast has received significant coverage from reliable sources (the WSJ for example) and I have sited those sources. If you checkout the entries for Limelight Networks or Akamai you will see that they are very similiar companies with similiar entries. They are clearly not blatant advertisements and neither is the EdgeCast entry. Thank you. Bmatschke (talk) 01:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The user Bmatschke work for EdgeCast, I think this should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnoldgibson (talk • contribs) 16:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I think if Panther Express and Limelight Networks warrant their own pages, EdgeCast Networks probably does too. Recent press coverage more than adequately establishes the company as meeting WP Notability guidelines. Perhaps article creator can supply add'l media sources to substantiate notability further. Speedy deletion seems unfair, though, given survival & existence of similarly-sized/noted competitor's WP articles. Anthony Citrano (talk) 22:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Just because another page exists that does not endow notability on this WP:WAX. It may well be they are suitable for deletion. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 23:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This entry should not be deleted

Again I see that someone is suggesting that the EdgeCast entry is "blatant advertisement" and should be removed. Again I point out that this entry is notable and should not be deleted because it meets the General Notability Guidline's main criteria i.e. "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." EdgeCast has received significant coverage from reliable sources (the WSJ for example) and I have sited those sources. Furthermore, if you look over the entries for Limelight Networks or Akamai you will see they are very similiar companies with similiar entries. They are clearly not blantant advertisements and neither is the EdgeCast Networks entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmatschke (talk • contribs) 01:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I am the author of this entry and I feel it is notable and should not be deleted because it meets the General Notability Guidline's main criteria i.e. "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." EdgeCast has received significant coverage from reliable sources (the WSJ for example) and I have sited those sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmatschke (talk • contribs) 00:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not a question of Notability. Please read the notice on the article. Toddst1 (talk) 00:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm new to Wikipedia so bear with me. The notice on his entry says it should be deleted because the first editor felt it was a "blatant advertisement" I don't follow that, Wikipedia is full of similiar entries for many other companies. This entry originally had a line of text that was perhaps not objective enough but that was removed. At this point, do you still feel it's a blatant advertisement? If so, why? Thank you for your time. Bmatschke (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)