Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cloud Slam


 * 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. No significant independent coverage. Jayjg (talk) 03:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Cloud Slam

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested prod (removed by article creator). No evidence that this event meets notability criteria: the linked Business Week piece is a promotional supplement (identified as such on the page), and I can turn up no non-PR national-level coverage in a news search. The most promising link, to Bloomberg, turns out to be a press release. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - advertising spam. No independent notable coverage. Racepacket (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Guys, This is not a spam. Just compare other conferences on computer science you have in Wikipedia and the one submitted. Cloud Slam has 88 sessions on topic of cloud computing (http://cloudslam09.com/content/schedule-cloud-slam-09-conference-156.html), it has been referenced on many major vendor websites (Platform Computing, AMD, Sun Microsystems) that has not been indexed by Google. I've done some research at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_computer_science_conferences, according your argumentation - one can delete most of conferences there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapenov (talk • contribs) 17:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Sapenov, thanks for your comments. To respond to your two points:


 * 1) To demonstrate notability, a subject must have received substantial coverage in multiple reliable, third-party sources - see this page for details of what qualifies as sources of this kind. If you know of references to Cloud Slam, could you provide links here, so we can assess them to see if they amount to substantial independent coverage? (A mere mention of a subject does not qualify as substantial coverage; this would need to be detailed and extensive discussion.)
 * 2) Because there is no formal editorial process, there may well be other articles on Wikipedia that are eligible for deletion, but have not (yet) been considered for it. Please see the article WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for details about why the existence of other articles on similar subjects doesn't necessarily affect any particular deletion discussion. Gonzonoir (talk) 17:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Gonzonoir, thanks for your points. I'll try to find reliable third-party sources, but it'll take time since it's been awhile. Off top the head here's reference on Platform Computing website http://www.platform.com/press-releases/2009/platform-ceo-to-be-keynote-speaker-at-cloud-slam-09, Sun Microsystems http://blogs.sun.com/cloud/entry/sun_at_cloudslam_2009, pretty notable cloud computing expert Steve Foskett http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/03/19/sun-cloud/ , leading analytics company Saugatuck http://www.slideshare.net/mik3w3st/saugatuck-cloud-slam-blue-skies , Steve Lesem CEO of Mezeo Software: http://stevelesem.sys-con.com/node/990758 , leading cloud computing testing vendor http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/bda/2009/04/cloud_slam_tom_lounibos_soasta.php , http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/bda/2009/04/cloud_slam_jonathan_bryce_rack.php , http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/bda/2009/04/cloud_slam_michael_berman_catb.php,

ERP.COM http://www.erp.com/my-erp/erp-community-events/details/49-cloud-slam-09.html

A lot of article in Russian editions of CIO.com, PCWorld and other media,e.g. http://www.osp.ru/pcworld/2009/12/11078735/, http://www.osp.ru/cio/2009/11/10527894/

I also know IBM has published references, but don't remember it now.

thanks, KS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapenov (talk • contribs) 18:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Update: I've looked at our logs for last several months and there are thousands of references to Cloud Slam from different websites. I'm going over it and post some at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cloud_Slam Sapenov (talk) 01:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's full list just for convenience:

I don't think this article is a masterpiece of writing art, but it, like most articles about thousands of similar conferences in wikipedia is pretty descriptive. This global event itself has gathered thousands of people, interested in cloud computing for lively discussion and exchange of ideas, it has definitely left deep impression in live world as well as internet. Here are some links from independent sources, that I am able to get off top the head:

English language resources:

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapenov (talk • contribs) 02:45, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Cloud Slam '09 Program
 * Cloud Slam '10 Website
 * These first two are primary sources, and though they help to verify that the article exists they can't be used to demonstrate notability. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Harvard University http://research4.dfci.harvard.edu/content/cloud-slam-2009-4-day-virtual-conference-cloud-computing-april-20-24
 * This is a blog reproducing a press release by the conference committee; there's no commentary, and no evidence that the blog itself is particularly prominent, so I don't think this demonstrates notability either. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Geoff Arnold: Live coverage of the Cloud Slam '09 Conference
 * This is a self-published source (see WP:RS), and though its author has a distinguished pedigree in computing I can see no evidence that the author is an "established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications" (to quote the WP:RS guideline). Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Backbone Magazine http://backbonemag.com/_pvwe1c41a9f/events/items/event_04200901.asp
 * The text at this link is reproduced in dozens of other places on the web, which makes me think it is straight up press-release copy. Is that the case? Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.cloudave.com/link/cloud-slam-09-conference-on-the-clouds
 * Again it's a blog, i.e. self-published, and I can see no evidence that the authors are sufficiently authoritative in print media to meet the requirements. Probably the best source yet, though. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://natishalom.typepad.com/nati_shaloms_blog/2009/05/practical-guide-for-developing-enterprise-application-on-the-cloud.html
 * No evidence that blog's author is an established expert. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.thinkstrategies.com/blog/2009/05/is-google-gumming-up-the-cloud-computing-movement.html
 * CloudSlam gets a passing mention here, but again no evidence that the blog's author is an established expert. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://markusklems.wordpress.com/2009/04/20/openspan/
 * Blogger is a student; no evidence of expertise. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://dallasdatacenter.com/news/press-releases/193-dallas-data-center-featured-as-a-cloud-computing-pioneer-and-sponsor-of-worlds-largest-virtual-cloud-computing-conference.html
 * It's a press release, so helps with verifiability, but doesn't speak to notability. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.ondemandbeat.com/2009/03/31/discount-passes-for-cloud-slam09-conference/
 * This is a promotional link on a blog with no evidence that the author meets that established expert standard. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * AMD Site http://sites.amd.com/uk/topic/cloud/Pages/about.aspx
 * All it says about Cloudslam is "Join us in this lively, discussion" - six words (however oddly punctuated, heh) isn't enough to amount to "substantial" coverage Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.platform.com/press-releases/2009/platform-ceo-to-be-keynote-speaker-at-cloud-slam-09
 * Again, it's a press release Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://blogs.sun.com/cloud/entry/sun_at_cloudslam_2009
 * Another theoretically heavyweight source, since Sun Microsystems are of course prominent, but: (a) it's not a substantial discussion of CloudSlam itself, and (b) I can't find proof that author Russ Castronovo has published substantially in this field outside of blogging. The Russ Castronovo producing several GScholar hits is a professor of American literature.
 * Notable cloud computing expert Steve Foskett http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/03/19/sun-cloud/
 * Steve Foskett is an established expert, so I think this is the best source yet, but I would not call this substantial discussion of CloudSlam itself. The author writes about what he's going to discuss at CloudSlam, but says next to nothing about the conference itself. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://univaud.com/about/news/press_2009/04152009.php
 * Press release Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Leading analytics company Saugatuck http://www.slideshare.net/mik3w3st/saugatuck-cloud-slam-blue-skies
 * This is a copy of the slides from someone's Cloudslam presentation and doesn't address notability. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sys-Con http://stevelesem.sys-con.com/node/990758
 * This is only a passing reference, not a substantial discussion. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/bda/2009/04/cloud_slam_tom_lounibos_soasta.php
 * http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/bda/2009/04/cloud_slam_jonathan_bryce_rack.php
 * http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/bda/2009/04/cloud_slam_michael_berman_catb.php
 * The preceding 3 links detail the subjects that their authors presented at Cloudslam; they don't discuss Cloudslam itself and couldn't be used to establish notability. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.erp.com/my-erp/erp-community-events/details/49-cloud-slam-09.html
 * Press release Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.zhen.org/zen20/2009/05/17/cloud-slam-09-golden-nuggets/
 * A passing reference to Cloudslam only Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://xeround.com/438-events
 * Verifies the company's presence at the event but doesn't indicate the event's notability. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Multiple references (we had a lot of guys presenting from VMware) http://blogs.vmware.com/console/2009/08/index.html
 * I'm not seeing a reference to Cloudslam on the linked page. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://cloudscaling.com/blog/cloud-computing/cloudslam-09-conference-materials
 * Self-published source with no evidence of author's established expertise Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * http://dorado.com/news/2009_Releases/4.13_Dain_CloudSlam.html
 * Press release Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * eVapt http://www.evapt.com/news/upcoming-events.php
 * A passing reference. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Russian language: Russian editions of
 * CIO.com http://www.osp.ru/cio/2009/11/10527894/
 * PCWorld http://www.osp.ru/pcworld/2009/12/11078735/

Sapenov (talk) 02:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I edited text, so it is neutral and doesn't sound like and advertisement. More edits to follow. Sapenov (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Relevant internal link has been added to wikify the article Sapenov (talk) 16:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Sapenov, thanks for engaging in the discussion and sorry to have taken so long to respond. I am away for personal reasons at present and unfortunately haven't time to review the sources, but someone else will review them as part of the AfD process. Please don't remove the afd tag from the article while the process is still underway. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:56, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Gonzonoir, thanks for response. I was under impression, my entry was forgotten :) Let's wait until next review, let me know what else needs to be done. Sapenov (talk) 07:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; The   Earwig   @  03:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note by relisting admin: although this debate looks long, only one user besides the nominator and the article creator commented. &mdash; The   Earwig   @  03:17, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. The conference seems to attract some top level executives for a few Fortune 500 companies, yet there is a lack of any significant independent coverage of the event. The only information that I could come up with came from either Cloud Slam itself, or various blogs. WP:N. Daa89563 (talk) 03:56, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

So, altogether, I have still seen no evidence that the subject is not notable, and think the article should be deleted. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Phew; I've gone through the list of links provided by Sapenov to see whether any of them appear to satisfy notability (please see notes for each above). These are my thoughts:
 * The volume of stuff here is immense, which is initially impressive. It is, though, in the nature of a web-based, web-focused event, at which companies and individuals are promoting themselves, to generate a lot of web-based coverage. What I was looking for was evidence that this event is being discussed and noticed by people other than the participants: independent news or scholarly coverage. I am still not seeing that evidence in the links provided.
 * The majority of sources listed are press releases, passing mentions, or self-published text (blogs) where there is no evidence that the author is an "established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications" (to quote the WP:RS guideline)
 * The best source above, I believe, is the Steve Foskett blog post, since it's by an established expert. But it contains no more than a passing reference, and it alone cannot convince me that this event is receiving substantial coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.
 * I regret I can't read Russian, so I cannot speak to the quality of the Russian-language sources linked.
 * I am not the world's most zealous crusader for the Wikipedia conflict of interest policy, but I want to note that we discourage contributors from working on articles about subjects in which they have a direct personal interest.
 * Weak Keep-While the above statement contradicts itself, I suggest that it should be kept given that this is its first annual conference. It boasts an impressive list of sponsers and notable speakers. Also, its among the premiere cloud computing conferences...its had its first meeting, but we'll need to see more meetings in order for it to solidify its notability.Smallman12q (talk) 22:53, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - no significant independent coverage. To expect notability in the future is WP:CRYSTAL.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 23:16, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Cloud Computing is really new thing so you won't find "established experts". The conference gathered 80% of cloud computing experts in person, there's strong evidence in form of video recordings of each session, that can be re-used by any established independent media (given they are up to date with the technology). There are closed analytic reports based on the conference done by Gartner, Forrester, 451 Group and other well-known experts (who either presented or attended as media reps), btw Geoff Arnold, who you neglect to recognize as established expert is heading Huawei's cloud computing department now :).

While this was a first conference and it can't be measured in number coverage sources in mass media, it had deep impact on social sphere (e.g. a lot of students in developing countries like Vietnam got access to the latest technology for free), it generated enough buzz in business world and really shaped cloud computing landscape, resulted millions of funding (e.g. Brick File System had been acquired for hundreds of millions of dollars) and other positive effects in business sense. I am satisfied with the outcomes of the conference, as it had brought a lot of useful practical results, rather than another pile of multi-page 'scientific' papers, that nobody cares about. Cheers, Sapenov (talk) 09:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.