Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talend (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 delete. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:03, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talend

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Meets WP:A7, WP:G11 - no credible claim of significance, promotional in tone and content. Poor references. Note also the {{news release}} since November 2017.

Disclosing that I CSD'd the article as tagged, but restored due to a valid 'objection' - AfDing as alternative - TNT ^💖 22:08, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unambiguous WP:PROMO. Additionally, it's difficult to take the argument about "information that's not coming from Talend website" at face value, given that an admitted company employee has been reverting efforts to remove content like "In today’s increasingly data-driven world, most companies use data integration and management software like Talend to enable their digital transformation and manage their entire data ecosystem." Bakazaka (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my original deletion nomination. Praxidicae (talk) 13:52, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For most publicly traded companies, it is easy to find evidence of notability. For Talend, this is not the case. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 17:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I agree with BillHPike. There are lots of Google News hits and even some Google Books hits for Talend, but I couldn't find a single reliable third-party source that discusses the company in some detail. The best are some reports that discuss specific acquisitions, but that's just routine coverage that WP:CORPDEPTH explicitly does not consider helpful. Huon (talk) 21:27, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
KeepA Wikipedia page about Talend is useful since it's an open source software. Over the past 4 days, I've removed non-verifiable information and added references to the existing page. The version available in talk should now meet Wikipedia standards. Regarding comments on notability from Huon and BillHPike, Talend is a public company, trading on Nasdaq with $150 Million revenue in 2017. The company gets regular coverage on the Wall Street Journal Forbes and international press like Le Monde.what would constitute evidence of notability? This page should not be deleted - especially when compared to pages from similar companies like SAP or IBM.

Whimsicaluser (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closing admin: The above user, a disclosed Talend employee, has altered the substantive content of their previous comments and moved them to the bottom of the discussion. Bakazaka (talk) 18:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep To add further to notability Talend is regularly covered by independent third-party media like CNBC, Barrons, and software industry trade publications like Computerworld. A quick search of Google books also covers Talend Next-Generation Big Data: A Practical Guide to Apache Kudu, Impala and Spark, Big Data Governance: An Emerging Imperative and Data Governance Tools: Evaluation Criteria, Big Data Governance, and Alignment with Enterprise Data Management. Most of the edits suggested on the Talk page on November 30th help make the page a more useful entry on a notable public company that is a player in a market that is projected to grow to $9.8 billion in current U.S. currency from 2017 through 2022 IDC. Jake.spencer041 (talk) 19:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC) Jake.Spencer041 (talk)[reply]
Comment - regarding the presented sources, the WSJ is semi-helpful, Le Monde more so, but the others are interviews with the CEO (not independent coverage of the company), a kind of "case study" that doesn't discuss Talend the company in any detail, and books about their software that mention the company in passing at best. The Forbes piece is not by staff but by a "contributor", effectively a blogger hosted by Forbes but not under Forbes' editorial control; that's not a reliable source. Huon (talk) 22:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looking for sources for this company was fascinating, there are so many PR-articles and stock reporting that it is difficult to find something useful. I initially thought this would be an easy Keep, but looking closer they all seem to be rehashed PR-statements or rehashed economic reports from the company. Even the WSJ article is mostly just restating information clearly coming directly from the company. The only article I can find that looks like independent journalism is the article in Le Monde[1]. Promotional tone is not a valid reason for deletion, but since the coverage in independent reliable sources seems to be so minimal (despite massive coverage in other types of sources) I think the article does not currently meet WP:GNG. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2018 (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.