Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pluggd


 * 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 with no prejudice against anyone creating a redirect at this title.  Hut 8.5  20:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Pluggd

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (companies) requirement. The company was mentioned in two reliable sources, but in the context of discussing its founder, who may have a bigger claim to notability; the company's coverage was pretty much in passing. I looked for other sources but except few more mentions in passing ( ex. a sentence in ) I don't see much. I don't think such mentions are enough to make this pass cited notability policies. WP:NOTYELLOWPAGES, and WP:CORPSPAM. Thoughts? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Economic Times piece linked above is about , which was a different venture (subsequently NextBigWhat). AllyD (talk) 08:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 08:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: The 2006-7 start-up coverage related to the firm's original proposition before they "witnessing iTunes “suck the air out” of the market" . I have added a brief summary of their subsequent refocus and then acquisition by another firm. There is already brief coverage at Limelight_Networks which seems sufficient but perhaps could be expanded to "August 2011 the company acquired Delve Networks, Inc. (formerly pluggd.com), a privately held provider..." if it was felt appropriate to selectively merge a trace history of the original start-up. AllyD (talk) 08:31, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * A redirect to Limelight Networks would be preferable to outright deletion, thank you for finding a valid target. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 00:28, 15 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as it is mentioned at the parent company article as is, that's all there's to say since it's no longer an active independent company. SwisterTwister   talk  22:19, 14 November 2016 (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.