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. In closing this AfD, I disregarded many of the comments made. I disregarded Smerdis' initial delete vote, because it only focused on the content being promotional, and his concern has been addressed somewhat after the vote was made. I also disregarded the SPA votes, for obvious reasons. After that, we have 1 keep and 1 delete vote, both from experienced editors, and both with valid arguments, although Cunard's analysis is more thorough and somewhat more convincing. However, my opinion is that this is not enough to declare a consensus to delete. At the very least, the author(s) of the article can/should use this discussion as a list of improvements that need to be made to the article. I would recommend that the article be renominated for deletion if the stated concerns with this article are not addressed in a reasonable amount of time (a few weeks, at a minimum). —SW—converse 15:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been 80% rewritten (will be finalized in a couple of days), the advertising was removed, provided references that include non-technical media (such as National Radio and TV, etc.)--feel free to review once again or suggest any more changes. Thanks. The-verver (talk) 01:20, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All you added is either blogs and local sources, either passing mentions or not about the company at all. And the article still reads like advertisement. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 11:03, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, what abstracts in the article would you suggest to change to make it sound more neutral, rather than advertising-like? Thank you. --The-verver (talk) 14:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know, several times I attempted to rewrite it in neutral way without saving changes, as WP:V and WP:OR issues don't allow to write at least anything viable. If the issues of this article could be addressed without its deletion, I would just implement them without taking it to AfD. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, I've significantly shortened the article, eliminating almost everything about services. Hope it's more neutral now. Instead, added more info about contributions to the community and educational initiatives. --The-verver (talk) 19:13, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; Last week, the article was tagged that it is being re-written at the moment to introduce more references (trusted coverage) and eliminate advertising. The company is an active organizer of non-commercial events for developers (in Denmark, US, Belarus, Ukraine, etc.) It is the first organizer of CloudCamp in both Danmark and Belarus, an international unconference held globally to support developer communities, rather than promote any commercial services. In Belarus, the company organizes 80% of non-commercial local developer events, such as the first local hackathon, numerous user group meeting, as well as speaks at various developer events, etc. The company also launches open source initiatives, such as Apatar--acknowledged globally by LinuxWorld, InformationWeek, EbizQ, Network World, TMC, InfoWorld, ZDNet, etc etc etc. (You can find not only press releases, but also detailed articles containing analysis, comparison, etc.) There are numerous interviews with Renat Khasanshyn, the CEO of the company, taken by DMReview, InformationWeek, REDHerring, Robert Scoble (yes, it is), etc. The process of re-writing was started but not finished yet! Please be patient, it takes time to gather all the materials. Thank you, guys. The-verver - (talk) 13:52, 26 March 2012 (UTC) — The-verver (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. -- Please view global contributions instead.The-verver (talk) 01:20, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:ORGIN on why neither of your arguments is in favor of keeping this article. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but your global contributions say nothing about the purpose of editing English Wikipedia, while the local contributions show that for years your edits were limited to this topic. BTW, you only had one edit on other Wikis before I tagged your vote with ((spa)), though you made 68 on them since. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:18, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, I've used to edit Wikipedia as an anonymous for at least a couple of years. Lots of typos, proof-reading, minor edits, etc. I had my password saved just on this sole computer. Couldn't even imagine that it matters so much, I'm in it not for a fame or statuses, it's a fun thing itself. Now I had a lesson learned and will be tracking all of changes to avoid such comments, however I admit that I'm more interested in contributing to local versions, it's true. There are so many things that have to be done there, ooh. =\ I'm sure you know that. --The-verver (talk) 19:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; It's quite popular company in Belarus ([1] and [2]) and gained popularity in other countries, there is a lot of links and mentions about Altoros (see <Альторос>, as well). Also, it regularly takes part in national and foreign IT conferences. There are a lot of people who mention this company in LinkedIn, Google+, Facebook, blogs, etc. Though I know this can't be considered as a trusted source, I think many people will be surprised that Wikipedia doesn't know anything about this company. Isn't it what Wikipedia was designed for (to find relevant and comprehensive information)? --Melnikaite (talk) 17:08, 28 March 2012 (UTC) — Melnikaite (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
A company of this domain can demonstrate effects only on some of the spheres mentioned above and Altoros successfully does this. It demonstrates effects on science (by participating in IT conferences as a speaker or expert, organizing technology communities both local and global), culture (by bringing international events to local communities (Cloudcamps, Hackatons)), education (by organizing free educational courses), economies (by supporting several start-up initiatives). -- Alexander Vergeichik (talk) 10:10, 29 March 2012 (UTC) — Alexander.vergeichik (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Are you sure you are talking about the effect, not about participation. What are its scientific accomplishments? What is its unique input in culture? Several local events? Another piece of software? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 10:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's about effect rather then simply participating. Few developers can afford going abroad to visit international conferences and Altoros brings the conferences, events, experts to people's native countries. Moreover, very few companies, if any, offer free of charge education opportunities, for many people that's really a chance to improve their life, and see an alternative world view. Allena.vasilenko (talk) 11:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC) — Allena.vasilenko (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
It's good that Altoros promotes itself not only with Wikipedia spam, but it still doesn't show the effect worth mentioning. Where is the UNESCO report on significance of educational opportunities provided by Altoros? Where is verifiable proof? In local media and blogs? If this company's efforts were not significant enough to be mentioned in a worldwide mainstream media, they are not worth mention on Wikipedia. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 11:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Brief mentions or articles about outsourcing with no mention of the company at all? Don't see the way they establish notability of this company. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ALL articles on outsourcing in the Reference section DO mention Altoros, please take a closer look. Articles that feature Altoros's subsidiaries (they should be better called departments, in reality) are not involved in outsourcing. There are NO articles in References that do not feature Altoros or its branches. --The-verver (talk) 12:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, let's have a look at the policy. According to WP:V and WP:CORPDEPTH, "A company...is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject." An then, "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability." As for the sources, most of them can be considered as reliable and independent--in accordance with WP:SOURCES--and satisfy WP:VERIFY. They are independent of Altoros, they are global and not local, they belong to established media companies (such as Associated Press, Herald Sun, etc.). By no doubt they are reliable and independent. I've several times listed some of them in this discussion already. All you are trying to say is that they just "mention" Altoros, which is a) obviously not true and b) Wikipedia's policy has a written rule for situations like this. See: "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability." The article about Altoros satisfies this rule, since multiple reliable independent sources are provided. Furthermore, in the policy there is no such term as "mentions;" the policy says that the mentions should not be a "trivial information." In WP:CORPDEPTH, you can see the list of what considered to be a trivial info: schedules, brief announcements, etc. The last line in the list is about "passing mentions," which you once cited, however in the references to publications at Mass High Tech Journal, Salon, and many others you can see that these articles describe how companies work with Altoros and what Altoros did for them. A "passing mention," according to WP:CORPDEPTH, are things like just mentioning the company in a title or small things like that. The publications I listed in this discussion earlier are definitely not the "passing mentions," since they either describe how companies work with Altoros ([3]), tell the history of how the company was founded ([4]), how it operates ([5], [6]), etc. All of these sources are definitely independent and represent Neutral Point of View (WP:NPV), and the information is not "trivial." Even if you personally think that the coverage is not significant in all of these articles (which is not true), the number of cited references that satisfy WP:V (see above) solves this problem--according to WP:CORPDEPTH. --The-verver (talk) 23:58, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, 1) please see the quotes from the Policy in the previous comment that explain why it is not obligatory and what should be done in case "the depth of coverage is not substantial;" 2) make sure you've checked my another comment below about the compliance with WP:MANYLINKS--this sole reason is enough to "demonstrate notability." --The-verver (talk) 16:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, creating Java Community in Belarus from scratch is an effect, not participation. Launching CloudCamp in two countries and its ongoing organization later on is an effect, as well, not just participation. Launching free educational classes for Ruby on Rails developers in Eastern Europe is an effect, not participation. (I stress that I talk about classes, not just regular meetings, which are also organized by Altoros, BTW!) --The-verver (talk) 12:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it indeed created Java community (which is evidently not true), there is no real impact behind this acclaimed creation of community unless nobody knew Java before Altoros started its activities. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, by saying Java Community I meant Java User Group in Belarus [7], of course. It's strange you don't know what User Group is. It would be silly to claim that someone rather than SUN Microsystems introduced Java to local developers. However, previously there were no strong-tied community for knowledge-sharing that would gather developers together on a regular basis to give educational presentations to each other, to attend presentations from SUN, Adobe, MySQL (now Oracle) representatives and talk to them in person, to drink beer in a large companionship after the sessions, to discuss the latest news/projects/etc.--the were no things like that prior to ByJUG have formed. --The-verver (talk) 22:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who noted this accomplishment as significant cultural/education/humanitarian impact on humanity? References, please. If you claim the cultural impact, such impact also should be covered in depth in independent reliable sources. I think you largely underestimate the amount of impact on society the company is expected to impose in order to become notable. The very fact that no editor with noticeable edit history outside this topic voted keep in this discussion shows that this company is of subjective importance at best. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 23:17, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please see my reply above that feature examples and citations from the policy. --The-verver (talk) 00:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It becomes rather odd that each my comment is replied to by a new user with no contribution background apart from Altoros article. Could please someone previously uninvolved give this situation a glance? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 11:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, Alexander Vergeichik and Allena.vasilenko are my colleagues who had helped to create the article prior to you initiated this discussion. You can view the page's history to check this. That's why they both are aware of the situation. Although they have a right to participate in this discussion (see WP:GAFD, "The author of the article can make his/her case like everyone else"), I kindly asked them not to participate in this thread after I saw their comments. As you can see, they didn't post anything since that. Though they act in WP:GOODFAITH and were extremely accused by some of your comments (e.g., calling their first contributions a "Wikipedia spam," etc.), they are still newbies and may not be aware of all policies and how Wikipedia discussions should be held. So I strongly agree that their comments can be discarded and not taken into consideration--even though they have a right to raise their voice, too, according to WP:GAFD#Discussion. --The-verver (talk) 31 March 2012 (UTC)
It's OK to defend the article you think deserves its living. Though all of you as the company's employees have a bias, that should be taken in consideration by others. And I indeed believe that even one's first contributions shouldn't be spam, which is the case with this article. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's why "I strongly agree that their comments can be discarded and not taken into consideration--even though they have a right to raise their voice, too, according to WP:GAFD#Discussion." --The-verver (talk) 16:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone, I've found one more conclusive reason for keeping the article. According to WP:MANYLINKS, "Even if an article does not appear to have sources making it notable, being linked directly from a significant number of other articles...shows that the information the article contains is valuable...Even the bare mention in other articles demonstrates notability. Deleting the page would then create red links in a lot of other articles," (i.e. Wikipedia articles). Later on, in WP:MANYLINKS, you can see that "it is best to name at least 3 articles that contain links to the page."Here's the proof that at least 3 articles in Wikipedia link to Altoros, which is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of WP:MANYLINKS and "demonstrate notability." For this reason, I'm also removing the WP:ORPH tag. Firstly, it can be placed only "if the article has ZERO incoming links;" and secondly, "three or more is ideal and will help ensure the article is reachable," which makes this article satisfy WP:ORPH, as well--along with notability. --The-verver (talk) 12:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Borderline keep. Its apparent influence on the computing scene in Eastern Europe seems notable, and applying a touch of discretion here would help counter Wikipedia's systemic bias. Having said that, the actual article is a extreme example of reference-stuffing, and if it's kept it should undergo a severe pruning. —SMALLJIM 15:31, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
From the references you might know that its influence on the computing scene is limited to one country where it is dramatically exaggerated by the editors above. Any IT company with a borderline real world influence in ex-Soviet Union gets really massive coverage in mainstream media. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:00, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, from the references you might know that its notability is NOT limited to one country, which is clearly proved by publications made in US, UK, Canada, Belarus, Russia, etc.--fell free to check the list more carefully. --The-verver (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Smalljim, thank you very much for the comment. I do appreciate that! --The-verver (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Analysis of the first 11 sources in the article by Cunard (talk·contribs):
"ISellMobile launches free app"An article in the Mobile Magazine by Noble House Media, the famous UK publisher of mobile magazines, mentions contribution of Altoros to iSellMobile, a free app – the article is primarily about ISellMobile. As the article contributors note, Altoros is merely a mention:
The ISellMobile App has been developed for Noble House by Altoros Systems, a software and mobile application development company. Altoros UK MD Tristan Palmer said: 'We are very pleased with the application and particularly excited to be involved with Noble House and the ISellMobile concept. It is a truly useful and innovative mobile sales and communication tool as well as a challenging technical project.'
"When Offshoring Goes Bad", An article by Salon (a part of The Associated Press) about outsourcing, mentioning Altoros as an opposite to bad offshoring (2004) – Altoros is mentioned only once: "For his latest project, an online aggregator site called CompareWirelessPhones.com, he relied on Altoros, a Tampa, Fla., company with a development team in Russia."
"Оффшорное программирование - хлеб белорусских айтишников", CNews.ru, the largest IT news source in Russia (a part of RBC), describes the state of IT in Belarus mentioning the key players, including Altoros.(in Russian)– a review of the article reveals that it is about IT in Belarus and does not provide nontrivial coverage about Altoros.
"Young software exec moves to open source model" Mass High Tech, a business journal in New England, interviews the CEO of Altoros about the history of Altoros Systems and future plans. – the article is about Renat Khasanshyn and Apatar, not Altoros, which is mentioned three times:
1. "Renat Khasanshyn, founder of Chicopee-based PLM software maker and IT services provider Altoros Systems Inc., recently launched Apatar Inc., which develops software that moves data in and out of a variety of sources." 2. "The company employs seven workers and operates in the same Chicopee facility as Altoros, which Khasanshyn founded in Florida in 2002." 3. "Khasanshyn, a native of Belarus, Russia, emigrated to the United States in 2001 and became the CTO of PriMed Inc., a St. Petersburg, Fla.-based insurance company, before starting Altoros the following year."
The passing mentions only provide context about Khasanshyn and Apatar and do not establish notability.
High-Tech R&D: Too Vital To Outsource?, Renat Khasanshyn, Altoros' CEO, speaks about R&D Outsourcing and the business model of his company in an E-commerce Times article, a resource of ECT News Network – Altoros is mentioned twice in this article:
1. Likewise, Altoros Systems, a global software development and consulting firm, has seen business increase dramatically since it set up U.S. offices in Tampa, Florida, and Chicopee, Massachusetts, said Renat Khasanshyn, director of North American operations for the company, which has headquarters in Minsk, Belarus. "The fact we're located in the United States became one of the reasons our current clients choose us," Khasanshyn told the E-Commerce Times. "From a client's perspective, it's very difficult to believe a company outside the States. The client is not assured, if something goes wrong. What should I do? Which court do I go to? It's very important for the client to have a service provider in the United States."
2. If cost is a development client's most important concern, then Altoros sends approximately 90 percent of the code-writing work to Minsk, Khasanshyn said, while doing just 10 percent on-site. If, on the other hand, time-to-market is the main concern, the developer may keep about 30 percent of the work inside the United States while turning over 70 percent to Minsk. "This way, we can achieve almost a 24-hour development cycle," he said.
It is mentioned only in the context of the subject of "outsourc[ing] IT activities related to R&D".
"$1000 за 24 часа: в Минске проходит хакатон hacby’11 web&mobile" A report from the first hackathon in Belarus, which was organized by Altoros (in Russian) – this somewhat promotional article is routine news coverage about a local event; there is little actual content that can be used to write a neutral article about Altoros.
"Это хакатон, детка!" Dev.by, the leading IT professional community in Belarus, posts a report about the first hackathon in Belarus organized by Altoros(in Russian)– there is no indication that this blog post has received the necessary editorial oversight to qualify as a reliable source.
Interview with Renat Khasanshyn, Jeremy Geelan, President & COO of Cloud Expo, Inc., asks Altoros' CEO to give an insight into data integration at the 5th International AJAXWorld Conference – an interview does not qualify as secondary coverage.
"Panel says offshoring good overall" (WebCite) An article published in The Herald-Sun about a panel that featured Altoros, IBM, and Duke University (18-12-2004) – Altoros is not mentioned in the text of the article, though a member of the company appears in the image (see the nametag).
I have stopped after reviewing the 11th source (there are 35 in total) because they look no more promising. The high quantity and low quality of the sources indicates Wikipedia:Bombardment has occurred:
Bombardment is the placement of a large number of references in an article in hopes that this will prevent it from ever getting deleted.
From the references you might know that its influence on the computing scene is limited to one country where it is dramatically exaggerated by the editors above. Any IT company with a borderline real world influence in ex-Soviet Union gets really massive coverage in mainstream media. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:00, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
This is a reasonable statement with which I agree.
Owing to lack of time, my participation in this AfD will be confined to this post.
Delete. Cunard (talk) 07:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Cunard, thank you for taking your time and browsing through at least several sources. =) I'll comment on your thoughts in a couple of hours, I need to go to work now. I completely agree with you that many of the links may be deleted--and they will be after this discussion will have ended. As for the number of links, I've quoted an abstract from WP:CORPDEPTH#Primary_criteria: "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability." Initially there were just 10 links, which is more than sufficient, in my opinion. As for the rest, please make sure you are familiar with WP:MANYLINKS: "Even if an article does not appear to have sources making it notable, being linked directly from a significant number of other articles...shows that the information the article contains is valuable...Even the bare mention in other articles demonstrates notability. Deleting the page would then create red links in a lot of other articles"--i.e. Wikipedia articles--"it is best to name at least 3 articles that contain links to the page."Here's the proof that at least 3 articles in Wikipedia link to Altoros--this reason alone is sufficient to "demonstrate notability," according to WP:MANYLINKS. --The-verver (talk) 09:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately nobody agrees with this essay, and specifically in parts like this, which contradict the policy. I'll take care of unlinking this company or removing its mentions when necessary after the closure of this AfD. As everybody can see, this won't hurt Wikipedia. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 10:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitrij, I'm afraid removing information, such as Altoros is a founder of Apatar and other things like that, may be considered as WP:VAN. Appropriate treatments are specified for that in Wikipedia's policy. Along with WP:BITE that you demonstrate through this topic. --The-verver (talk) 14:43, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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.