Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Novatium


 * 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 keep. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:34, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Novatium

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Quite clear advertising and it's not enough to then say the sheer blatancy of PR and quit close signs to paid advertising in them, and searches mirror a few pieces of them, showing there's not even anything close to genuine substance, let alone actually satisfying our policies and it's clear this was never planned for anything else but advertising hence there's nothing to negotiate. These subjects and matters are quite easy to pin as advertising but when it's as clearly company-involved like this, there's simply no other chances of hopeful improvements especially when the company account "Novatium" heavily contributed, subsequently followed by apparent employees (especially note the 2 accounts Emmess2005 and Emmess2006). Also important to note is the fact of 3 deletions close to the start of this current one, and this was in fact speedied again at the time but removed. There's nothing to actually improve if all it's planned for, regardless, is for advertising which is exactly the foundation here, hence violating policies. SwisterTwister  talk  05:04, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.  The article notes: "... And long before them, Oracle and Sun Microsystems chiefs Larry Ellison and Scott McNealy tried, and failed, to market so-called network PCs. So what gives tiny Novatium an edge over such high-profile competition? Most of those companies have focused on making traditional desktop PCs or laptops cheaper by using older, slower chips and skimping on memory and hard-drive storage. Novatium, on the other hand, has created a state-of-the-art network computer that mimics a traditional desktop machine at a fraction of the cost--and that will soon be made to run on any television, anywhere. ... Novatium sees a similar opportunity lurking today. Just as millions of Indians skipped land-based telephones altogether and went straight to wireless when it became affordable, Jain and Novatium's other two founders--Ashok Jhunjhunwala, a renowned engineering professor at the Indian Institute of Technology, and Ray Stata, chairman of U.S.-based Analog Devices, a $2.6 billion chipmaker--are betting that they'll skip desktop PCs and go straight to network computers."  The article notes: "If Rajesh Jain is successful, the NetTV, which hooks up to any television, could be the first in a family of devices that connect the next billion people to the Internet. Jain, 39, is cofounder and chairman of Novatium, the Chennai-based company that makes NetTV and NetPC, a similar product that uses a normal computer monitor. Both are based on cheap cell-phone chips and come without the hard-disk drive, extensive memory and prepackaged software thatadd hundreds of dollars to the cost of regular PCs. Instead, they are little more than a keyboard, a screen and a couple of USB ports--and use a central network server to run software applications and store data. Novatium already sells the NetPC for only $100--just within reach of India's growing middle class--and Jain believes he can soon drive the price down to $70. ... Started with only $2.5 million, Novatium has just 60 employees, but it is attracting attention from many major players. One reason is that Novatium machines are open to all. Unlike most thin clients, Novatium's devices work with any network server without requiring major modifications, whether it uses proprietary software from Microsoft or Sun, or free software from an open-source company like Linux. Microsoft is participating in the Chennai pilot program because Novatium's subscription-based payment system could generate profit in markets where most users run pirated versions of Microsoft products. Top U.S.-based executives from Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL and other companies have visited Hema's house and other homes wired with the NetPC and the Nova NetTV to see how the utility computing model could work in the home. And network server giant Sun Microsystems--whose slogan has long been 'The network is the computer'--has already inked a deal to market the NetPC to enterprises and schools in India beginning this year. 'There's a 100 million-unit opportunity in the next five years in India itself,' Jain says."  The article notes: "The Nova netPC works on a ‘thin client’ concept. It is a small box and does not contain any software or application. It is linked to a central server, which hosts all applications. The box does not have any configuration or processor. The central service has all the storage and guarantees data privacy through encryption. ... Novatium was co-founded by Mr Ray Stata, Chairman of Analog Devices, Mr Rajesh Jain, Managing Director of Netcore Solutions, and Prof Ashok Jhunjhunwala of IIT-Madras.Mr Singh said Novatium has decided to postpone by six months raising `large sums of money' for expansion due to the high cost of funds. However, it will raise around $5 million for the short term requirement."  The article notes: "They grabbed international headlines when they launched their $100 (around Rs 4200) Net PC in January this year. It was touted to be one of the cheapest Net PCs anywhere in the world. So much so that Novatium Solutions, the Chennai-based company that was incubated at IIT Chennai went on to be featured by Newsweek as their cover story some months ago. Six months later, after tasting success with their pilot project in collaboration with MTNL in Delhi, the company is now drawing up expansion plans. This month Novatium is signing a commercial deal with MTNL to provide the PC and computing services with all MTNL boradband plans. 'In the pilot project, MTNL included it in their Rs 399 broadband plan. Under the revenue sharing agreement, MTNL kept Rs 100 for the net connectivity while Novatium got Rs 299 for computing services per user,' says Jaideep Kohli, COO, Novatium Solutions."  The article notes: "Novatium Solutions, the company started by Rajesh Jain of Netcore Solutions, Ray Stata of Analog Devices, Prof Ashok Jhunjhunwala of IIT-Madras and Alok Singh, former CEO of Cummins Auto Services, took a year to develop its first product called the Nova NetPC version 1. The NetPC is a thin client computer. This means that the system retains most of the functionalities of a desktop PC but moves the complexities of software and hardware maintenance and upgrade as well as data security to a central server elsewhere. ... The four-and-a-half year old company has done a turnover of Rs 50 crore. Novatium has a trademark on a technology they call Plug & Compute and this is enabled by 13 patents on the box, server side billing engine, protocol and others. It has also developed its own operating system."  The article notes: "LIKE a bad penny that keeps turning up, the idea of a thin computing client refuses to die. Its latest reincarnation is the $100 'Un-PC' that Newsweek trumpets in its Feb. 12 issue as a replacement for the personal computer. A company in India called Novatium has begun selling the NetPC for only $100, but here's the catch: it has no hard disk, very little memory to speak of, and uses a cheap processor of undisclosed origin that's more typically found on mobile phones. The software? Zip. You'll have to subscribe to that, including the operating system, which will be rented out to you over the Internet. You can't save your files locally, either--you'll have to send them back to the server over the Internet." <li> The article notes: "Novatium, an obscure Indian company, is just about three months away from offering a basic personal computer for about $75. With a new monitor the price goes to $150, CNET News reported Wednesday. Used monitors keep the price below $120, Novatium founder Rajesh Jain said."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Novatium to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 07:17, 30 December 2016 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * I removed the promotional material here. Although the article can be further improved, it now complies with Neutral point of view. Editing policy. Cunard (talk) 07:17, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment and analysis :
 * {{Tq|(Hold for company CEO story and quote) .... Novatium already sells the NetPC for only $100--just within reach of India's growing middle class--and Jain believes he can soon drive the price down to $70....Started with only $2.5 million, Novatium has 60 employees, but it is attracting attention from many major players. (This is classic PR since it only started with CEO story, pricing information but ends with the fact of "looking for major players" thus instant signs it's not even a significant or established company if it needs funding support, something no company will have unless it's trivial, which this is)
 * {{tq|A company in India called Novatium has begun selling the NetPC for only $100, but here's the catch}} (Itself a business report with the classic signs of PR costuming)
 * {{Tq|Novatium Solutions, the company started by Rajesh Jain of Netcore Solutions, Ray Stata of Analog Devices, Prof Ashok Jhunjhunwala of IIT-Madras and Alok Singh, former CEO of Cummins Auto Services, took a year to develop its first product called the Nova NetPC version 1....(Hold for funding and financials)
 * {{Tq|They grabbed international headlines when they launched their $100 (around Rs 4200) Net PC in January this year.}}
 * As it is, we've established at all recent AfDs that we can never confide in Indian publications because of their blatancy of republishing advertising so actually suggesting "But it's sourcing" is not solving the actual concern, and itself, I emphasized my nomination shows this to be clear company-involved advertising, therefore it violates policies, and it's a non-negotiable policy not open to questioning. There's no compromises since it's clear the company's only attention is company announcements and financial quotes, classic signs of a money-seeking company, not an established one. The fact the links are conveniently placed whenever the company needed funding, shows exactly that. When we started Wikipedia, we explicitly made policies against advertising and it's these cases in which we use it. SwisterTwister   talk  18:45, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I do not believe CNN or Newsweek are advertising for Novatium. Cunard (talk) 06:01, 2 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep, per Cunard's good work. The deletion nominator's suggestion that all Indian sources should be dismissed, because they are Indian, is preposterous?  Racist?  -- do  ncr  am  02:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, {{user|Doncram}}. I agree that the nominator's comment dismissing all Indian sources is unacceptable. Cunard (talk) 06:01, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * How the heck does saying that Indian publications cannot be trusted make it racist? Or is this some kind of Western political correctness? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:47, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * What the heck do you mean, Lemongirl942? Are you trying to defend the statement?  If you do not condemn it, i don't know what to think about you. Nitpicking about how to categorize it exactly is probably silly:  call it ignorant, stupid, offensive, perhaps xenophobic, perhaps racist, what is your choice?  It is possibly racist, though technically if the utterer is Indian then perhaps not.  This should be condemned strongly, is the main thing, this is not what Wikipedia is about.  You have got to be kidding if you think it is legitimate to dismiss all Indian sources.


 * If you want to nitpick rather than condemn what should be condemned...okay some characteristics of that person would have to be determined to figure out if they are literally racist vs. being ignorant/obnoxious for some other reason. Okay, I will assume "good faith" on Lemongirl942's part, and i will assume that was a real question, i.e. that Lemongirl942 does not see Indians as being a different race than Western-European-descent.  I believe surveys show that most editors here are Western-European descent, and I would guess that the utterer is, else they would not have said what they did.  Well in my life experience I have it on personal authority of an extremely well-educated (in most elite Indian and American schools, with impeccable British-accent English) Indian from Mumbai, who is proudly Brahmin, that a Western European descent American is of different race than they.  It's a point of view and seemed not to be a matter of ignorance on their part;  I don't know if they were technically correct by the most current academic definitions but it is a point of view I assume held by more than just theirself, and as such then I think if some people think they are a different race then they are.  I don't know if the utterer here considers Indians to be a different race, although some do, hence I left a question mark.  If the utterer wants to clarify whether they are in fact racist or whether their stupid statement was similar to the stupidity of Americans who commit hate crimes against Sikhs because they think they are Muslim, well, that would be just peachy. -- do  ncr  am  19:16, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Please calm down. I think both SwisterTwister and Lemongirl942 didn´t want to offend anynone. As far as I understand, they voiced concern about rather permissive publishing policy of some sources. However, there are far more sources and at least article/opinion piece by Om Malik on CNN Money looks really good. We should judge available sources, not throw harsh words on other editors. Pavlor (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That is too kind. The statement, complete with malapropism was "As it is, we've established at all recent AfDs that we can never confide in Indian publications...."  It should be condemned clearly, not glossed over. -- do  ncr  am  20:51, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, SwisterTwister´s record on AfD shows he judges nearly any source too hard - be it "western" or "indian" one. He may be extreme deletionist editor, but he certainly doesn´t deserve accusation of racism. This is wrong forum for such discussion anyway. Pavlor (talk) 07:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * {{ping|Pavlor}} Although there is a part of your view that is valid for the charged word, what about the source of the contention? "...we've established at all recent AfDs that we can never confide in Indian publications..."  The statement presented false attribution, of a "we" (that includes you) who has condemned the media quality-control of a subcontinent with 1 billion people. What about the statement, "quit {{sic}} close signs to paid advertising...and it's clear this was never planned for anything else but advertising".  This statement provides no evidence of paid COI, yet proceeds to disparage a content contributor's planning.  Nor does an absence of evidence logically lead to things being clear.   Do you agree that in each case, the nominator should provide evidence or strike the comment?  Unscintillating (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * {{ping|Unscintillating}} Do you remember any instance when SwisterTwister judged available sources as subject independend and reliable? I sometimes feel as if he condemned the media quality-control not of a mere subcontinent with 1 billion people, but entire planet with 7+ billion people. Sorry for such harsh joke (I hope SwisterTwister doesn´t mind, sorry again), but accusation of racism is in this case baseless. There are good indian sources and there are bad (same for european, or american etc.). As I see it, more and more online media portals simply re-publish company press releases and there are editors (like SwisterTwister), who find these sources unacceptable even when published by respected webpage. To be fair, in many AfDs are such flawed sources presented as really good base for an article and (if my memory serves me right) one of recent company AfDs was full of indian sources of variable quality with heated argument about them. SwisterTwister´s dislike for indian sources may have originated right there. To your question, any claim should be based on evidence. If such evidence is inadequate, other editors have their own mind and can decide for themselves. Enough talking about fellow Wikipedia editor. Pavlor (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America{{sup| 1000 }} 08:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America{{sup| 1000 }} 08:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep – Meets WP:CORPDEPTH per a source review. Promotional tone in the article has been addressed by User:Cunard, who copy edited it (diff). In addition to the sources provided above, here's a book source: link (snippet view), another news source: link (bylined article), and a product review from ZDNet: link. Additional sources are available. North America{{sup| 1000 }} 08:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:GNG, WP:NCORP - Sufficient reliable secundary sources. Though I do not like the fact that I could not find their revenue. -- Taketa (talk) 09:45, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * {{u|Taketa}}: Privately-held companies often do not directly disclose revenue figures to the public. North America{{sup| 1000 }} 09:52, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Noted. - Taketa (talk) 10:02, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}
 * 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.