Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Webgistix


 * 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.-- Kubigula (talk) 02:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Webgistix

 * – ( View AfD View log )

spammy article on non notable "internet company" Wuh  Wuz  Dat  17:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Very weak sourcing that is more akin to paid articles to trade rags that don't pass RS. Have to agree with the nom for the same reasons.  Dennis Brown (talk) 19:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Updated this article because it was out of date, but I can see how some content might be viewed as advertising. Edited out some content, all others are sourced by independent, third-party publications. GeoffreyYu7 (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Maybe I am just missing it. I see links to trade mags, but I don't see any links that would pass wp:rs, ie: NOT trade mags and are instead true 3rd party references.  Trade mags are easy to buy "articles" in, which is why most wouldn't be considered under wp:rs as "third party, reliable sources".  Without multiple true reliable sources, I don't see much difference before and after the edit.  Dennis Brown (talk) 21:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - No doubt you are correct that trade publications are more susceptible to paid advertisements than others, but that doesn’t mean every trade publication is a mercenary mouthpiece. I’ll review the sources individually:


 * Olean Times Herald – Not a trade magazine, but a fairly significant newspaper that covers the region around the city of Olean in NY.


 * E-Commerce Times – A trade paper, but the article is completely tone-neutral. It discusses fulfillment houses in general, and mentions Webgistix in only one sentence: “Yugster.com uses Webgistix.” Pretty unlikely it’s a paid advertisement for Webgistix.


 * Supply&Demand Chain – (No longer cited)


 * The Paypers – (No longer cited)


 * Las Vegas Business Press – Not a trade publication, and a fairly significant newspaper in Las Vegas. It deals with business in Las Vegas in general, mostly news about the gaming industry. Article also interviews their competitor without bias, which would make no sense for a paid advertisement.


 * IAOP List – It’s a list of companies that have won a award, and the sentence citing it notes that Webgistix has won the award., should be straightforward.


 * Auction Bytes – (No longer cited)


 * Please explain which sources you consider biased with these in mind. I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia, so I'll welcome any suggestions. GeoffreyYu7 (talk) 22:08, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Yet another online business that fancies itself an encyclopedia subject: an Internet company that provides outsourced e-commerce order fulfillment to a wide variety of customers.  -25 notability points for "e-commerce". - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think you might be getting the wrong impression from 'internet company' here. They own and operate offices and warehouses on the ground in New York, Vegas, Singapore, and some other countries. Their customers are primarily, but not limited to, companies that sell merchandise online. The company is notable because it has been mentioned by multiple, neutral, independent sources, which meets Notability. If you feel a source is NOT neutral or independent, please explain your reasoning based on the individual case, thanks. Also note I've removed the dubious Supply&Demand Chain, AuctionByte, and The Paypers citations, and added an article that features Webgistix significantly by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the largest daily circulation newspaper in Nevada. GeoffreyYu7 (talk) 17:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.234.30.203 (talk)
 * Comment I think we get that they exist, the question is whether or not they meet the criteria for inclusion here. It doesn't matter now "notable" they are under any other guidelines, it only matters if and how they meet the criteria here.  After the recent modifications and adjustments and such, they still don't appear to meet the criteria as getting significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject matter, IMHO.  Dennis Brown (talk) 22:21, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I am not quite sure I'm understanding you correctly. I've only ever referred to the Wikipedia guideline for notability, is there another I should be looking at? I've linked three articles that feature Webgistix significantly. These are from the Olean Times Herald, the Las Vegas Business Press, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal, all of which are large, established, and undeniably neutral publications. You simply cannot buy your way into these papers. With that in mind, I can't see how any of them fail Wiki's standards as reliable, independent source material. If you could let me know specifically which one you find dubious, it would help a great deal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeoffreyYu7 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Notability is a bit of jargon that doesn't really help; what we're really after is "long term historical notability, and that can't be had just from counting sources.  In one of the offered stories, Webgistix personnel are quoted as one source in a story about holiday shopping.  Another is "Local company finds way to outsource".  Another is a puff piece about a warehouse in Las Vegas..  I don't see any of these stories as elevating this business to the sort of thing that ought to have a stand alone encyclopedia article. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. First off, I think you're being a little unfair about the sources. The Las Vegas Review-Journal article quotes Webgistix's CEO, and spends about 25% of the article talking about the company, far more than the other sources in the article. They mention its expected growth level, previous growth, number of employees, warehouse size(s), number and type of customers, as well as shipping volume. The reason they do this is because they feel the company is significant enough to write about. Olean Times calls Webgistix a local company because, at the time, the headquarters was in Olean. The title "Local Company Finds Way To Outsource To Olean" is meant to be a clever wordplay, because outsourcing usually destroys local companies, not helps them. The Olean Times is NOT a local newspaper, as it covers and has circulation in New York and Pennsylvania. The article is entirely about Webgistix.


 * Finally, I don't see how you can say that the business press article is a puff piece. It talks about a warehouse for all of one paragraph. Which it does because that's what fulfillment houses do, they take orders, carry inventory, and ship them, thus they need warehouses. The piece mainly deals with how eCommerce businesses are helping Nevada diversify its industry beyond gambling, how eCommerce businesses gain an advantage by having an on-the-ground presence, and how Webgistix is establishing a global business. Please read the articles more carefully, they are quality, not just quantity. As for why Webgistix is notable:


 * 1: It was established in the beginning of 2001, making it one of the first eCommerce Fulfillment services that still exists. Think back to the internet ten years ago. Yeah, it was just as bad as you remember.


 * 2: Fulfillment houses are becoming more and more important as the number of online retailers rise. As proof of this, just a week ago, eBay bought GSI Commerce, probably one of the largest fulfillment houses there is, for 2.4 billion dollars.


 * 3: The company is one of the fastest growing companies in Nevada, and is on track to grow by 100% this year, effectively doubling its value. All the articles I've linked are from 2009 and 2010, meaning that it only became a notable company only recently. At the pace of growth, it's inevitable that it will only become more notable.


 * 4: It's significant enough that the former CEO of McAfee, Dale Fuller, decided to chair its board.


 * 5: There are numerous and major authors writing about Webgistix. If a writer is not paid to specifically write about a subject, then they write about it because they think other people would find it interesting, thus making it notable. The purpose of Wiki is so that people can find information about things they are interested in. This is why the article you linked on enduring notability focuses ONLY on reputable sourcing, because sources themselves are a measure of notability.


 * This is a small article and I don't believe it's promotional in any way. If you want to suggest edits, I would be happy to work towards that. But if you're saying the subject itself is not notable then I must respectfully disagree based on the reasons above. User:GeoffreyYu7 - User talk:GeoffreyYu7 23:39, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Sources very weak with just a mention of the company. Several are hometown newspapers and even then articles are about business or economic issues and not Webgistix itself. GcSwRhIc (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2011 (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.