Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telestream


 * 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. Nominator has changed vote to keep and no other delete votes are present. Smashvilletalk 18:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Telestream

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Bundling in this editor's other recently created pages. There are probably more:
 * - Dank (push to talk) 17:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * - Dank (push to talk) 17:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * - Dank (push to talk) 17:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

By WP:COMPANY criteria, Telestream appears to be a non-notable software company that does not need its own encyclopedia article. References given in the article (blood drive, volunteer fire department support) in no way demonstrate notability. Company does make one well-known software title (Flip4Mac), but as far as I know, in Wikipedia, notability is not inherited.

As far as I can tell, the contributions of the article's primary editor have been directed to increasing the exposure of Telestream and its products. --Tetromino (talk) 04:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  09:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I do not understand how you can say that Telestream is not a notable company. Have you looked at some of their partners? Here is a short list of some you may know: Avid, Pinnacle, Sony, Dolby Digital, Real Networks, HP, IBM, Kodak, and Microsoft. I realize that they have one big product, which is Flip4Mac, but I believe that the other products are just as good; maybe not as well know as Flip4Mac, but still good. Please let me know why you have a problem with these pages, it can't just be because you haven't heard of the company, is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballplyr86 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Please explain how Telestream satisfies the criteria in WP:COMPANY. In particular, have a look at the "Primary criteria" section. Has Telestream (the company itself, not just Flip4Mac) received significant, non-trivial, and non-press-release coverage in national or international media? Are there books, TV specials, or scientific articles that talk about the company? As far as I can tell (I googled a bit), the answer is no. IMHO, a short article in a county newspaper about a blood drive cannot serve to establish notability. Tetromino (talk) 17:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll throw my hat in the ring on this discussion. Flip4Mac is and always has been a product of Telestream the company. Historically a perception existed that Flip4Mac was a company unto itself, which is untrue. In short, no Telestream = no Flip4Mac. Therefore, since it is software, and not a company, and the company that makes it has literally millions of customers and users, by definition Telestream has merit and is notable, just based on the following:

Quoting from WP:COMPANY:

Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice." It is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance." Please consider notable and demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education. Large organizations are likely to have more readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability; however, smaller organizations can be notable, just as individuals can be notable, and arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations."

So, according to this entry, entertainment is a valid area of notability and size should have no bearing. Therefore, on this basis alone, the Telestream article should stand.

From MacWorldNews

It took Telestream six years after its founding in 1998 to cook up an Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) application, but some 15 million Mac owners are glad it did.

But we will go farther and post references from secondary sources that support notability for Telestream, especially our industry firsts for product development in video capture and transcoding. Please hold our pages out of Speedy Delete mode. This will give us enough time to show how Telestream and it's products are notable and will hold their own, using the primary criteria as a guide.

--Mcwikits (talk) 18:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC) — Mcwikits (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Mcwikits makes the point that I wanted to make. I and millions of people who use Telestream's products (including Flip4Mac) on an everyday basis would say that it is notable. I understand not wanting to allow random, unknown companies and software to be able to advertise or whatever on Wikipedia, but I believe that we have a strong case to keep these pages, and we are not alone. I was talking to an admin, User:Graeme Bartlett, and he said, "'There seems to be a strong case for Telestream to be kept.'" on his talk page, User talk:Graeme Bartlett. I would like to know what Tetromino thinks about what has been posted here. I have been doing my best to and more credible sources to the Telestream page, and also all of it's product pages that are also up for deletion.--Ballplyr86 (talk) 17:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The Telestream article has been improved, and all three articles (Telestream, Episode/Episode Pro and Episode Engine) now have references to reliable sources demonstrating notability. Ballplyr86, thank you for doing this work. I now vote for Keep. Although I had nominated the articles for deletion, I believe that an admin will need to close the discussion. --Tetromino (talk) 03:58, 15 July 2009 (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.