Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clarizen (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 no consensus, the voters failed to agree whether existing coverage can be classified as routine.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:18, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarizen

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

Notability: significant RS coverage cannot be found; advertorial content. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:08, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and I would've suggested PROD instead also, if not for the 1st AfD thus it's not a choice; none of this is actually convincing and there's essentially nothing else for substance so delete by all means. SwisterTwister talk 02:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 02:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 02:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Meets WP:GNG per a review of available sources. Promotional tone can be addressed by copy editing the article. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:45, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

(Don't be misled by the "routine"-sounding title of this Forbes article. The article provides significant coverage about the company; only the first paragraph focuses upon funding. The additional five paragraphs do not.)

A Brief Guide to Cloud Computing

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Dane2007 ^talk 02:18, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The coverage is still all typical PR-driven industry press, such as:

IDF news service: "Starting this week, Clarizen is dangling a potentially tempting new carrot -- big discounts for Project customers who switch. "Microsoft Project may be a great tool for some people. But for most people, it's just not," said Eran Aloni, vice president of product marketing."
CNet: "Clarizen this week announced that it launched version 3.0 of its online project management tool. Clarizen 3.0 adds a variety of new features, including the option to manage business issues, track expenses, and view Gantt charts."
"Today's project teams have to be mobile whether they know it or not when you factor in telecommuting, off hours technical issues, and every team member seems to be on their own schedule. Recently, Clarizen, an Israel-based project management platform provider launched their new Clarizen Mobile app ( iPhone/Android) as part of their Winter 2015 release."
PC World: product review
"The Clarizen thesis is actually pretty sound – the idea being that when you integrate social engagement across project planning and management tools, you gain more efficiency than would have been seen in the old paradigm where email was the de facto communication channel."

I admit that the coverage is better than some, and it's available across a reasonably wide timespan. But this still feels like a "product / company directory" material, vs an encyclopedia article. We don't have any coverage beyond product news. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:39, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I had also examined these and they were simply not the needed substance; as with my nomination, this is all still based top closely with the usual, expected and trivial coverage. SwisterTwister talk 03:12, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Shamah, David (2011-04-12). "Stellar Startups: An Israeli flag in the cloud". The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on 2016-08-24. Retrieved 2016-08-24.
  The article notes:
  
  Established in Hod Hasharon in 2007 (on the basis of a previously existing Israeli startup), Clarizen has gone on to become a real phenomenon. The company has sales offices in California (development is still done in Israel), and it has become of the most successful Israeli startups in recent years.
  Clarizen has won numerous awards, most recently a “Codie” (issued by the Software and Information Industry Association for excellence in software development within the software industry) in 2010. And it has been a big hit with businesses throughout the world.
  This is a review of the company. David Shamah is a Jerusalem Post staff writer.
2. Grady, Barbara (2007-08-10). "Clarizen launches San Mateo operations". San Mateo County Times. Archived from the original on 2016-08-24. Retrieved 2016-08-24.
  The article notes:
  
  Avi Nowogrodski launched his software company in 2005 in Tel Aviv, Israel, which he called "the Silicon Valley of the Middle East" and where software engineers are plenty and his heart belongs.
  But Thursday, Nowogrodski's firm, Clarizen Inc., began its first day in its new headquarters in San Mateo.
  ...
  Clarizen's Web-based software, Project Management 2.0, is used by companies that want numerous and often geographically separated people to collaborate on a project. Since it is hosted on the Web, people can tap into it from wherever they are with the proper security codes.
  The software already has 800 customers and 2,500 users — and it hasn't yet been formally released. Two months ago Clarizen released a beta version to test, and three weeks ago the company started taking sales orders for the formal release. He said 30 customers already put in orders.
3. The sources listed by Northamerica1000 (talk · contribs) such as the ABC News article. I consider coverage of a company's product to be about the company itself and contributing to notability.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Clarizen to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 06:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is still hardly enough as there has been analysis, as it is, of the sources listed above, and these two, while third-party and from known news sources, are still essentially still summarizing what the company is about. We cannot simply improve and keep alone from these 2 sources. SwisterTwister talk 06:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- the above coverage is not sufficient either. Jerusalem Post article is local coverage; it's an article based on the interview with the founder, so not entirely independent. San Mateo New is routine local coverage about a company office opening. This confirms that the company exists, but is hardly sufficient for notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I see all the sources as being overly contaminated with press release material. Tho the Jerusalem Post is a paper of international importance, even it can still cover local companies in a promotional manner. DGG ( talk ) 21:15, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarizen is based in San Mateo, California, United States. It was founded in Hod HaSharon, which is 69.9 km from Jerusalem. Clarizen is not a local company to The Jerusalem Post. Cunard (talk) 18:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a situation where there are sources, and I can't be too upset if the decision goes the other way. However, I end up in the delete camp because I agree the sourcing really is just reconstituted press release material that is of little use in building a substantive article. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 13:43, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Little, Brown Book Group (which published the book A Brief Guide to Cloud Computing), ABC News, CNET, TechRepublic, The Jerusalem Post, and San Mateo County Times all provide significant coverage of the subject. I don't think it is fair to say they are all "just reconstituted press release material that is of little use in building a substantive article". They provide many facts about the company's history that could be used to write a good encyclopedia article.

Cunard (talk) 18:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly....information such as their offered services, where their company locations and offices are located , awards and information about its clients and customers. Only other clients and investors want to know about this. SwisterTwister talk 18:11, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What information do you expect in a company article?

The sources Northamerica1000 (talk · contribs) and I provided here establish that:

Avinoam Nowogrodski is the co-founder and CEO of Clarizen. (source)
Clarizen's customers in 2011 included NASA, Hertz, Lenovo, Fujitsu, UPS, GE Healthcare and NBC. (source)
Clarizen was established in Hod Hasharon, Israel, in 2007. (source)
Clarizen is based on a previously existing Israeli startup. (source)
Clarizen won the Software and Information Industry Association's Codie award in 2010. (source)
Clarizen moved its headquarters to San Mateo, California, in 2007. (source)
The company moved from Israel to California because most of the company's customers are based in the United States. (source)
In 2007, Clarizen's Web-based software, Project Management 2.0, had 800 customers and 2,500 users. (source)
In August 2007, Clarizen had 50 employees in Israel and six in San Mateo. (source)
"Clarizen offers a SaaS project-management application that can be collaboratively used to manage anything from one-off projects to resources, timesheets, budgets, or expenses. The application displays a linear timeline or 'roadmap' of each project with project progress and projected completion dates." (book source)
In 2014, the company had a $35 million venture funding round led by Goldman Sachs. (source)
By 2014, the company had raised $90 million. (source)
In 2014, the company had 120 employees. (source)
In 2014, the company had over 2,000 customers in 76 countries, including Electronic Arts and Sony. (source)

Some of this information is already in the Wikipedia article. The facts about the company's history I have provided here contradict Xymmax's assertion that the sources are "little use in building a substantive article".

Cunard (talk) 21:38, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Avinoam Nowogrodski is the co-founder and CEO of Clarizen. (source)

Routine coverage and a non-notable individual (no article). K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarizen's customers in 2011 included NASA, Hertz, Lenovo, Fujitsu, UPS, GE Healthcare and NBC. (source)

According to the company: "Although most of Clarizen’s clients are smaller, Nowogrodski says, “we have a good number of larger companies that based their management systems on Clarizen as well. We have about 200 new companies joining us every day.” Followed by: "Indeed, the roster of companies big and small companies that use Clarizen for some or all of their projects is quite impressive, and it includes NASA, Hertz, Lenovo, Fujitsu, UPS, GE Healthcare and NBC, to mention a few." K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarizen was established in Hod Hasharon, Israel, in 2007. (source)

Routine coverage. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarizen is based on a previously existing Israeli startup. (source)

So? K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarizen won the Software and Information Industry Association's Codie award in 2010. (source)

Industry award. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarizen moved its headquarters to San Mateo, California, in 2007. (source)

Routine corporate news. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The company moved from Israel to California because most of the company's customers are based in the United States. (source)

Routine corporate news. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In 2007, Clarizen's Web-based software, Project Management 2.0, had 800 customers and 2,500 users. (source)

According to the company. Etc. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- I added some inline commentary above. This is (mostly) routine corporate news, and does not rise to the level of encyclopedia notability. This all reads like corporate directory, only of interest to a company's prospective customers and investors. Wikipedia is written for general audience, and I don't see any content above that would be interesting or important to the general audience. The company exists, it has customers and investors, and it's developing a product. That's all routine information which is available on the company's website. A wiki article is not required; also see WP:WEBHOST. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What information do you expect in a company article that is not present here? Cunard (talk) 22:45, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- my general approach is to assess whether a Wiki article provides information that cannot be found on the company website. In the case of the information above, all of this (customers, office moves, the name of the CEO, funding rounds) can be found on Clarizen's website and an encyclopedia article is redundant, or, worse, serves as a promotional vehicle. In general, small private companies tend to be non-notable (by encyclopedia standards) unless they have invented a new market, have a cult following for their products, have been involved in a major scandal or are preparing for an IPO (but by this point, they are probably not small). Hope this helps clarify my position. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:07, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, only routine corporate information; reads like a press release with no real notability. Kierzek (talk) 22:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources provided seem to pass GNG. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 00:55, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Although I appreciate the user's considerations of GNG, I wonder if they actually took to mind the comments that analyzed those exact sources, shoeing they were in fact simply PR. SwisterTwister talk 01:34, 29 August 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.