Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WhereverTV


 * 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. (non-admin closure) SST  flyer  07:51, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

WhereverTV

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Looks like a service that had legitimate hopes for becoming a good Internet television service when it launched years ago, but since then hasn't done very much and now has gone into an insidious strategy where they pick up any free/low-cost livestreaming network source on the Internet and package it in for a monthly fee, as many shady IPTV services do. Most of the 'channels' available through this service are available for free through their network's websites, and the sources about this are mainly all PR promoting the service or spam of some kind. The only reason this has been prominent on Wikipedia is that a user with a COI spammed our network articles for three years quietly by replacing the official streaming links for a network with an ad for their service in external links sections and turned List of Internet television providers into an insane advertising playground for all of Wherever's services with every network cut off from their own articles here (See the COIN section about this; the user has now been blocked). This is not a prominent provider of IPTV, and the lack of sources pans out that finding.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:38, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  21:36, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  21:36, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Leaning delete - there's lots of coverage of the announcement, but little evidence of follow-through, or that people would plausibly want to know about them and look them up, and the page views seem to reflect this - David Gerard (talk) 00:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak delete as it's clear that WhereverTV is not continuing to remain relevant after launching. A look at the news tab in search results indicates on primary press releases since 2014. Apart from this, the article reads too much like an advertisement. Burroughs&#39;10 (talk) 19:17, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article notes: "Some speakers made more serious points. Mark Cavicchia, the founder and CEO of WhereverTV, pointed to Time Warner Cable's relatively small download/upload limit of 5GB per month for certain Internet customers who pay $29.95 monthly. Those who pay $54.90 each month receive a 40GB cap. This 'unreasonable limitation is not just unfair to consumers. It's ludicrous,' Cavicchia said. 'Broadband providers and their competing content services benefit.' Cavicchia's WhereverTV offers an intriguing product: a sleek $199 black box that lets you watch TV shows beamed over the Internet, with no computer or monthly subscription required. Web users can also tune in. The selection is mixed, offering excellent channels like Britain's Sky News and less useful ones like Vietnam's state propaganda channel Hanoi TV. Even in its limited form, WhereverTV competes squarely with Time Warner Cable's channel offerings. Cavicchia said that after just 16 minutes of a 'full-throttle' connection watching TV, a cable broadband customer can exceed the monthly gigabyte cap, making it an 'exorbitant toll.'"  The article notes: "With the WhereverTV Receiver (www.wherever.tv), anyone can watch hundreds of live international television channels in more than 40 languages from almost 100 countries around the world. Much of this content is otherwise unavailable for viewing on a TV at any price, and it now can be viewed from the comfort of the living room. WhereverTV’s program guide application, the Global IPG, manages an unlimited number of Internet video sources in a traditional television viewing experience. At only 5” x 5” x 1” and weighing a mere 6 ounces, the WhereverTV Receiver readily fits into a consumer’s existing audio-visual system and can be carried in a briefcase for use anywhere. All that is required a router with broadband internet access and a standard television set."  The article notes: "[慧聪网讯]7月9日青岛国际电子产品展览会的新闻发布会上，来自美国的WhereverTV创始人与CEOMarkCavicchia宣布WhereverTV接收机的正式投放. 这款来自消费电子先锋企业的WhereverTV接收机可将全球电视节目通过互联网直接与电视连接，售价为199.99美元，包含了基本的服务需求，而无需激活费用和常年的费用，首批货将在下周二（2008年7月15日）到达国内."   The article notes: "Ashish Ranjan, a scientist with the National Institute of Health who lives in Gaithersburg, Md., found WhereverTV through a Web search a couple months ago and signed up for a Watch India subscription. He moved from India to the United States in 2005, and at one point tried using his computer to stream his favorite Indian channels to his TV. 'But then I couldn't work on my laptop, or change channels easily,' he said. 'They give you a remote with the WhereverTV.' Cavicchia's company is working with Retro Films HD Inc. of Las Vegas to put its The Cowboys Network on the Yahoo! widget that is inside new Samsung, Sony, Vizio and other Internet enabled TVs. Classic western movies from the 1930s through the '50s will be available on demand, likely by later this month, through the TV widget, Cavicchia said. The network also shows movies through its Web site." <li> The article notes: "WhereverTV got $150,000 from Innovation Works this year for software development. The South Side company plans to start selling a $199 device in June that allows people to view any video signal from the Internet on television. 'Without the funding from Innovation Works, we wouldn't be launching next month,' WhereverTV CEO Mark Cavicchia said. The Coraopolis native said he got the idea in China, after his computer kept crashing while he tried to watch streaming video of a Steelers-Browns game."</li> <li> The article notes: "WhereverTV Catch the flavor of your next destination with this Web-TV aggregator, which collects and organizes more than 1,200 international streaming stations. The optional WhereverTV Receiver ($200) also relays them directly to your home or hotel TV without monthly subscription fees. (Free, wherever.tv)"</li> <li> The article notes: "Robinson-based startup WhereverTV is gunning for the other 91 percent by making it easy and cheap for consumers to watch anything they want on the Web, anywhere, anytime. 'Consumers don't want to know where [TV] is coming from, they want to hit a play button and see the video, said Mark Cavicchia, who founded WhereverTV two years ago. WhereverTV's software, which is still in development, would allow consumers to connect a Wi-Fi ready mobile device to a TV and use it like a remote control to access a personalized menu of TV channels and programs, movie downloads, video clips, etc. Even more important to WhereverTV's success is that consumers can take their tailor-made, a la carte TV wherever they go -- home, work, hotels -- a feature that Mr. Cavicchia said sets it apart from its rivals."</li> <li> The article notes: "Can’t afford that round-the-world trip you’ve always dreamed of taking? Now you can bring the world to your living room instead: WhereverTV, which offers an online collection of international TV channels, is bringing its service to U.S. TVs with a new set-top box. The company’s $199 WhereverTV Receiver connects to your TV, allowing you to watch more than 800 foreign TV stations from the comfort of your couch. But if your computer and your TV aren’t in the same room, you might need a very long Ethernet cord. The WhereverTV Receiver is actually very easy to set up. You first connect it to your router or modem via Ethernet, then connect it to your TV via composite A/V, plug it in, and you’re ready to go. All of the cables are included, but the Ethernet cable is only two meters long — if only my TV were that close to my router. My router is upstairs and my TV is downstairs, so I ended up dragging my router down the stairs and dragging an extra-long Ethernet cord across the living room. Hardly an ideal situation — and not one that would work if I were planning on keeping the WhereverTV receiver installed past my testing period."</li> <li></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow WhereverTV to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 01:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * Comment Most of the sources are promotional 'what could be' stories from 2008-2010 that thought the service would get a toehold in the market under its original business strategy, or Pittsburgh area 'local company hopes to hit it big' fluff that didn't pan out. There's nothing after that and looking at the service now, the company's receiver pretty much was done once the Roku and Apple TV basically became the main set-top boxes in the market, and since then they've declined (especially with Sling TV and Playstation Vue and other OTT services now on the market); what logical company would use a strategy of spamming every network article here for three years with subtle 'buy our service' links? If I'm to be convinced this has retained the notability it did in the past, current-day sources are needed.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 05:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * If I'm to be convinced this has retained the notability it did in the past, current-day sources are needed. – from Notability: "Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of 'significant coverage' in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage." That the company had notability in the past means it is notable. The sources I've listed here include nonlocal sources like CNET, Arab News, 慧聪网, Walla!, and The Denver Post. Cunard (talk) 05:52, 28 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- WP:PROMO / WP:WEBHOST. The coverage listed above is either PR-like or trivial, such as "Even in its limited form, WhereverTV competes squarely with Time Warner Cable's channel offerings. Cavicchia said that after just 16 minutes of a "full-throttle" connection watching TV, a cable broadband customer can exceed the monthly gigabyte cap, making it an "exorbitant toll."" The promo-like coverage does not contribute to GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:06, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The CNET article is a review of WhereverTV's product. It compares WhereverTV with Time Warner Cable. That the reviewer said WhereverTV, though "in its limited form", is a competitor of Time Warner Cable does not make the source "PR-like or trivial". Including quotes from the company's CEO is standard journalistic practice and does not mean the source is unusable in establishing notability. Cunard (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment -- this is still insufficient to meet GNG. I do not see coverage that raises to this level. These are trivial product reviews. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:48, 28 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete by all means as this is only here as an advertisement, the users involved with starting this and the history itself suggest this; thus nothing at all suggesting actually keeping hence making worse. The above sources are also then simply PR which is especially expected with this subject. SwisterTwister   talk  07:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The sources provided above are not PR. They were written by journalists with no affiliation with WhereverTV. From Notability (organizations and companies): "Deep coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about an organization." The sources I listed here provide "deep coverage" of the subject by discussing the company's history and products. Cunard (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment -- the resulting article is WP:PROMO which is part of WP:NOT and is thus a valid reason for deletion. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:45, 28 August 2016 (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, MelanieN (talk) 02:17, 29 August 2016 (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. Relisting comment: I don't know why re-listed this Afd the previous time as it could have been closed as Delete, given the consensus obvious at that time. Absent any explanation from her, I am led to presume that there might be some reasoning that she may have had in re-listing, and given the recent Keep comment, I am re-listing this Afd (although the obvious consensus including the Keep assertion till now still seems to be to Delete the article... I have pinged Melanie to keep her in the loop.... Lourdes  03:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per Cunard: multiple coverage is demonstrated over a period of years, and notability is not temporary. Some of the prose has a vaguely promotional but it's nothing so fundamental that it can't be addressed by editing.--Arxiloxos (talk) 05:03, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lourdes  03:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Commment -- given COI and PROMO issues, I still advocate deletion. I don't see how this article adds value to the encyclopedia in the current form, and it could be a potential time sink trying to maintain its neutrality. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:58, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I can address the COI and WP:PROMO issues if the article is kept. As noted above, some of the content is "vaguely promotional but it's nothing so fundamental that it can't be addressed by editing". But I am reluctant to work on improving the article because it would not be a good use of my time if editors still supported deletion as is the case at Articles for deletion/Invest.com and Articles for deletion/Clickability. Cunard (talk) 17:32, 11 September 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.