Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RainStor


 * 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 no consensus, based largely on the low rate of participation. Not relisting a third time as unlikely to result in 'delete' at this point, hence the NCS close. Daniel (talk) 06:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

RainStor

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article is referenced only by announcements for a failed database product.  DGG ( talk ) 05:32, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  This analyst report provides 438 words of coverage about RainStor. It has a "Cautions" section, which notes: "While RainStor provides retention, legal hold and other repository management functions, it does not provide front-end application business logic for identification of data for archiving, and must rely on partners for this capability, if required. No UI is available for management operations, including archiving processes. Interaction with the system is via command line interface or Java API. ODBC/JDBC interfaces are supported for query."  The article contains analysis from a research analyst:"The company has been in existence since 2004, but has only commercialized its product since 2008. But according to Bantleman, the company now has over 100 customers, including two of the top five telecom operators in North America and one of the country's largest investment banks. It also has agreements with companies such as H-P, Amdocs and other systems resellers. Gartner analyst Merv Adrian says having gained experience serving a wide variety of large customers shows the company is ready for prime time. 'Their ability to deliver what they promise is demonstrable,' he said. ... Gartner's Adrian notes, 'this is not a couple of guys in a garage in Palo Alto. They’ve earned the right to be taken seriously.'"  The book notes, "RainStor is a UK company that builds high-capacity data archiving and management systems. RainStor is an interesting case study because they deal with a technical domain where complexity comes from high data volumes and high-performance requirements, combined with advanced compression and data management algorithms. The company has fewer than 30 employees, and about half of them work in Research and Development, so they have to be efficient in building and supporting their software. All the developers and testers work as part of the same Scrum team, although they’re now thinking about splitting it into two."  The article includes detailed analysis of the company: "There are huge changes for RainStor here: a new software release; the extension to the cloud; a large increase in partnerships, with EMC obviously needing lots of attention; the company rebranding; and relocating its headquarters from grassy old-world Gloucester to live-wire Silicon Valley. If Bantleman's right and the technology is as good as he says, and EMC loves it to bits, then, fingers crossed, fame and an IPO fortune awaits. If he's wrong, then a fate like that of Copan Systems, InPhase Technologies and Verari Systems lies ahead." <li> The book notes: "Big transaction data and M2M data RainStor uses data compression techniques to reduce the volume of big data. RainStor delivers two editions of its database product to manage massive volumes of structured, semi-structured, and unstructured data such as telephone CDRs, utility smart meter readings, and log files: [discussion of the two editions] RainStor offers significant improvements over LZO and Gzip, which are the preferred techniques to compress data in Hadoop. RainStor also supports SQL access to the underlying data so that data can be accessed directly by business intelligence tools."</li> <li></li> <li></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow RainStor to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 10:31, 1 February 2021 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * An alternative to deletion is to merge RainStor to Teradata, the company that acquired it, per Deletion policy. I would prefer to keep RainStor as a standalone article because a merge of the entire article would be undue weight. Cunard (talk) 10:31, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment, you have been asked several times by many editors in the past to stop placing walls of references at AfDs. All that is required is for you to link to our 2/3/4 best references. You've posted 7 here, but you've posted 10 at another AfD and 27 at yet another. Please rein it in. <b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>++ 15:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:38, 3 February 2021 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep There is reference to at least two analyst reports on the company and their product. This meets the criteria for establishing notability. Topic meets NCORP. <b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>++ 15:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * A*Delete I do see so the necessary references--the Gartner reports are routine voerage, if those are. the ones being referred to. We've never accepted their Magic Quadrant as enough for notability.  DGG ( talk ) 06:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This is a duplicate "Delete" comment as you are the AfD nominator. Analyst reports from Gartner are not routine coverage. From Notability (organizations and companies), "sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage and analyst reports." Although RainStor is not a publicly traded corporation, the guideline says analyst reports can be used to establish notability for companies. Cunard (talk) 11:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.