Talk:DataGravity

comments
Hello, and I have seen the banners added to the page, I wrote yesterday on the Talk Page of the editor that placed the first banner, but I still have not received a response, so I copy it here, and I added in the article the new references I found: And:
 * http://www.businessinsider.com/exclusive-paula-longs-new-42-million-startup-is-an-ingenius-way-to-do-big-data-2013-3
 * http://fortune.com/2016/03/14/datagravity-pulls-plug-hardware/
 * https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/05/datagravity_acquisition/
 * https://www.xconomy.com/boston/2017/07/11/datagravity-snapped-up-by-hytrust-after-struggles-and-layoffs/
 * http://www.telegram.com/news/20170724/wall-amp-main-datagravity-falls-to-earth
 * https://www.forbes.com/sites/geristengel/2014/04/23/growing-companies-big-isnt-just-for-the-boys/#39366e1779a6 - DataGravity only mentioned -.
 * https://www.techrepublic.com/article/data-storytelling-offers-a-new-approach-to-storage-says-datagravity-founders/ - replacing Businesswire -

The company was mentioned as a section within the article of its founder, and I thought it was better to separate it. It is possible for you to rename the article?, in fact it is DataGravity Inc.

I also edited the article to be more neutral. It is not clear to me if I can remove the banners or if I should wait for your ok. Thanks!--BelleBenny (talk) 03:04, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * the new sources give better indication of notability. The Businesswire ref is a press release, the award is minor, and the CrunchBase directory listing indicates existence, not notability, but I think there is sufficient coverage from enough third-party sources to remove the Notability tag. I'm glad the mission statement was removed: these are almost never needed, and usuually sound promotional (see WP:MISSION). One last thing: you use a 2002 primary source by Jim Gray to verify the statement that the company was named after Gray's idea. It doesn't. We need an additional source that explicitly connects the two, otherwise this is original research. We as editors cannot infer or make educated guesses, even if it's likely to be true. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 04:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments, I understand perfectly. I will look for a source for the mention of Jim Gray, if I do not find it I will delete the sentence. Another editor participated, adding information and replacing promotional information that I had deleted, I also went back to edit it, check it if you can. Thanks!--BelleBenny (talk) 07:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello again! I have noticed that you have changed the name of the article, thank you very much! but could you incorporate the term INC at the end? since Data Gravity is also a concept about the performance of data access, and maybe it can be confused with the company.--BelleBenny (talk) 03:24, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Per WP:COMMONNAME, article titles are generally the most commonly used name of a company or entity, even if it isn't the official name. The number of reliable sources using "DataGravity" appears to quite outnumber those using "DataGravity Inc." There are currently no other article on Wikipedia likely to be confused with this company name, and the only mention of 'Data Gravity' currently on Wikipedia refers to a concept by Dave McCrory of Basho Technologies. A simple Google search suggests the concept is more strongly tied to McCrory than to, say, Jim Gray. Should Dave McCrory merit an article that discusses his idea, and/or if Jim Gray's article is expanded to encompass his usage, then a disambiguation note might be warranted. Per WP:SMALLDETAILS, slight differences in spelling, capitalization or punctuation can also aid in distinguishing topics. thus, "data gravity" might be made into an article on the computing term, or a redirect to another article that discuses it, while the capitalized "Data Gravity" and spaceless "DataGravity" can be presumed to most appropriately refer to the company. --Animalparty! (talk) 07:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Great, I understand. Thanks!--BelleBenny (talk) 05:17, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

neutrality
When I saw the initial tag on advertisement/neutrality concerns, I did some research. One thing I noticed was HyTrust mentions in their press release they "acquired the assets of DataGravity" (https://www.hytrust.com/hytrust-and-datagravity/). This seemed a contentious point in a few of the cited sources, which work to not call this an asset sale. I noticed BelleBenny undid that distinction in the recent edits, and rather than forcing any editor to pick a side, felt it best to honor the spirit of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicting_sources and cite both perspectives on the matter since they: come from reliable sources and contain direct quotes and correspondence from the parties involved. Arodwins (talk) 11:49, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, I really didn´t think that this could be so important, I don´t understand it either ... I edited the “assets“ part because I thought that the important thing here was that the company was acquired by HyTrust, then if it was its assets or the company, was a secondary detail. Anyway, I have no problem with these editions.--BelleBenny (talk) 05:17, 3 February 2018 (UTC)