Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RHUB

RHUB

RHUB (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Promotion for non-notable company; article written by single purpose account who is the CTO of the company. Unable to find any significant coverage of this company. Articles on RHUB have been repeatedly put into Wikipedia by other SPAs and then deleted; see logs [1], [2], and [3]. Haakon (talk) 14:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

• Keep COI and neutrality issues aside, this company meets the notability requirements for WP, per Google News hits. Article needs work, but does not warrant deletion. Angryapathy (talk) 14:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
  • 429 Google hits, mostly to self-published press-releases, makes the company notable? Haakon (talk) 15:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
    • [4], [5], [6] are a few articles that discuss RHUB. There are a ton of PR releases, but the company seems to be getting secondary press. It's not strong notability, marginal at best, but I believe it meets the threshhold. Angryapathy (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete History of spamming WP by former org. members with article removed (twice) as spam. A new group of SPAs using similar names now appear re-adding this article and promoting it on other articles. Unless this article reflects neutrality (which it does not) and notability (which is marginal), recommend deletion. Calltech (talk) 18:01, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
• Speedy delete, yet another tech business, and unambiguous advertising: Soon the two founders found that the market needed an appliance solution for web conferencing to facilitate deployment, improve security and eliminate monthly subscription costs to end users. After several rounds of trials and errors, they settled down the hardware selection --- an embedded Linux-based communication device, which is not only reliable but also cost effective and consumes less than 4.5 watts power. In the same year when the product was shipped to the market, it was recognized as one of "2007 Tech Innovators Finalists". Let's put some teeth in it! - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

• Keep, I am the RHUB article writer and the CTO/Co-Founder of RHUB. Let me try to address the challenges from discussion:

> 429 Google hits, mostly to self-published press-releases, makes the company notable?

I am not clear how Haakon got the results. Here is what I got by typing "RHUB" or "RHUBCOM" in Google:

RHUB: 53,500 results RHUBCOM: 53,200 results

RHUB today employs 45 employees in the Silicon Valley. For a software company with only five years of history, that is notable. Here is the impact RHUB has brought to the world:

• 8000+ customer using RHUB branded products
• Over million of users using RHUB products via OEM partners
• Support employment of hundreds of resellers in the US via the top-tier distributors: Ingram Micro, D&H.

> History of spamming WP by former org. members

I regret for this. Here is what was happening. In 7/09, we hired a contract marketing firm. They created an RHUB article in Wikipedia, which was removed eventually. Later I was asked to create an RHUB article because I am the best person to tell the story behind RHUB, which may meet Wikipedia expectation. I was also told that visitors from Wikipedia stayed with the RHUB website several times longer than those from Google search. This is good to RHUB but also shows the RHUB article does bring values to Wikipedia visitors. That is why I am willing to spend time on this article and answer the challenges from you.

I have asked the contract firm to stop making attempt to create any articles for RHUB.

> A new group of SPAs using similar names now appear re-adding this article and promoting it on other articles.

I have created only one link from "Web Conferencing". If there are any links to my RHUB article from other articles, please remove them.

> yet another tech business, and unambiguous advertising

I am going to take another trial by providing as much information as I can and invite you edit it. Please take a little time to edit the writing instead of easily claiming "unambiguous advertising". Any constructive suggestions from you are welcome. But please don't discourage any more. We are professionals.

I hope more Wikipedia editors work as "Peter Chastain" does. Please do something like this from Peter:

"To reduce the chances of deletion, you might like to draft your article before submission, then get me or any other editor to proofread it."

Jmao1 (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)