Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Grovo

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was Delete. — xaosflux  Talk 04:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Grovo


Not a chance of being acceptable: it is almost identical to the repeatedly deleted mainspace article.  DGG ( talk ) 01:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * That is categorically false. The original mainspace article was only deleted once, by DGG, after it was up for years with no issue, not "repeatedly" as  DGG falsely claims. I've pasted the full version of the original deleted article below.  The only section that is the same in the new draft is the "funding" section, which lists the amounts raised in various rounds and the company's investors. Besides that, the new draft at : is very different. I am not a very experienced editor, so I'm going to work harder to make sure that I'm complying with the Wikipedia culture and policies when contributing content. I ask that you not delete the draft, and instead allow me to fix it. Goodwork84 (talk) 15:48, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * DGG is correct: the mainspace article was deleted three times. JohnCD (talk) 16:57, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

ORIGINAL DELETED MAINSPACE ARTICLE

Grovo (pronounced grō-vō) is a learning technology company that gives enterprise organizations the technology and content to align, train and develop their teams. The company is known for its microlearning method [1] - 60 second video lessons geared to today's short attention spans. The videos combine voiceover, screencasts, and animation, and are followed by a short quiz to increase retention.[2][3] All of Grovo’s content is written and produced by the company.[4] In November 2014 Grovo was named by Internet Week as the "Best Place to Work in New York City Tech."[5]

Contents [hide] 1 History 2 About Grovo.com 3 Company Culture 4 Venture Funding 5 References 6 External links 1 History Grovo was co-founded by Jeff Fernandez, Nick Narodny and Surag Mungekar in October 2010.[6] In December 2010, Grovo won the Vator Splash startup competition in New York.[7] Grovo was also a finalist in Business Insider's Startup 2011 competition [8] and was named one of Mashable's top online learning resources for small businesses.[9]

In August 2012, Grovo used its Facebook Timeline to display a history of the Internet, which was reviewed in the Huffington Post [10] and Mashable.[11] In January 2013, Grovo began releasing a series of live action YouTube videos called Grovo Presents, which discusses recent updates to popular websites in a humorous light.[12]

Grovo is a member of the NY Tech Meet Up's Made in New York City and is located at 3 Park Avenue in New York City.[13]

2 About Grovo.com Grovo is a cloud-based learning platform. It provides training technology, microlearning content and one-on-one service to enterprise organizations like Pitney Bowes, Wells Fargo, Chevron, and Tracfone Wireless. The Grovo platform allows companies to create training pulled from Grovo’s library of microlearning lessons, as well as upload their own proprietary content. It also features tools to assign training and track performance.

Grovo's content library includes 5,000 video lessons and assessments covering more than 170 topics. All of Grovo’s content is written and produced by the company.

3 Company Culture In November 2014, Internet Week named Grovo the "Best Place to Work in New York City Tech." The company earned the highest overall score among 30 finalists. The awards recognize companies for creating workplace cultures and policies that are helping to make to make New York City one of the world’s top tech hubs.[14]

CEO Jeff Fernandez has spoken about the company's culture at SXSW, [15] Scale Up,[16] NewCo Festival New York,[17] and TEDx.[18]

4 Venture Funding In May 2011 Grovo announced that it had closed its seed funding from Krishna “Kittu” Kolluri, general partner at New Enterprise Associates; Andy Dunn, CEO and Founder of Bonobos and Mareza Larizadeh of Larizadeh Capital Partners, and others.[19]

On July 17, 2013, Grovo announced a $5.5 million Series A round of venture capital funding.[20] Greg Waldorf, CEO-in-residence at Accel Partners and founding investor and former CEO of e-Harmony, led the financing, which also included Jeff Clavier of SoftTechVC, Greg Sands of CostanoaVC, and Andy Dunn of Red Swan Ventures.[21] Greg Waldorf joined the Board of Directors.[21] Additional and previous investors include David Tisch, Kal Vepuri, Thomas Lehrman, David Honig and Bil Lohse, the former President of Ziff Davis Publishing and Social Start.

On February 18, 2015, Grovo announced a $15 million Series B round from existing investors Accel Partners, Costanoa Venture Capital, Greg Waldorf and SoftTech VC.[22] The round closed on August 8, 2014. [23]Accel's Sameer Gandhi joined Grovo's Board of Directors.

Goodwork84 (talk) 15:31, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Salvagable with a rewrite. No question that the article could use some work (I already did some editing on it at AfC), but let's look at the sources. Some are bloggy or just mentions, but I find these sources that are substantial in my estimation:
 * Information Age has about four paragraphs on their training
 * PC Magazine a software review, pretty extensive
 * VentureBeat I don't know this publication, but the article is substantial
 * TechCrunch substantial article, generally considered a reliable source

Then there are the articles about it being named "best place to work" by Internet Week, but I'm not sure that really counts toward notability. I also don't usually count the sources and info about funding as supporting notability, and I think that section could be reduced. I usually see funding info (as well as revenue info) to be an insider view -- it's what matters to the people working for the company, but not for someone looking for information on WP. So if the funding and the "best place to work" were reduced to a sentence or two each, we're left with their training, which I woulnd't call their "Business model" as it is in the article now. We'd have a paragraph or two about the training using the four sources above as a basis. That's what I think could be salvaged from this article. LaMona (talk) 17:33, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This draftspace one should be deleted because the mainspace one has the prior, full history. The editor should go and argue for restoration of the original mainspace one at DRV and present evidence there to restore the original one into mainspace and work off that. We don't need duplicate ones and in the chance this get approved, we'll probably have to history merge this anyways. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Advert masquerading as an article, been rejected from mainspace, and will never pass here. Probably should block the editor as well, obvious COI SPA, who's clearly WP:NOTHERE. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:06, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Encourage a slightly more liberal interpretation of G4 by User:DGG.  It has been a long time DGG was chastised for overstepping.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is a copy of the mainspace draft and is not needed. Legacypac (talk) 22:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Legacypac, I created a new draft because that was what DGG instructed me to do after he deleted the mainspace article....  Joseph2302, this is the first I've heard about SPA, so didn't realize only editing articles on things you're interested in was against Wikipedia's policy. When I have some, I will research some other topics.  Ricky81682, I tried to get  DGG to reinstate the mainspace article so I could improve that version using credible sources, but he wouldn't reinstate it....What is DRV? Goodwork84 (talk) 00:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * An SPA is shorthand for Single Purpose Account. There is nothing wrong with being an SPA except for the optics of it. Other editors may assume an SPA is pushing an unusual point of view and/or they are unlikely to be aware of broader Wikipedia policies and practices. WP:DRV is a place to make a case that something was deleted in error and should be reinstated. Legacypac (talk) 00:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:DRV is WP:Deletion review. It's the place to request restoration so you can again work on an article because of new sources you have found. The new sources you've provided can be used as evidence to justify restoration. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Legacypac and Ricky81682, thank you! Both comments are helpful. Do you recommend that I submit to deletion review? Goodwork84 (talk) 23:10, 10 February 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.