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 redirect to Traction Labs. Consensus that this is not independently notable. Editors are now free to merge stuff from history and/or nominate Traction Labs for deletion too. Sandstein 07:19, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Buzzstarter[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Company has pivoted and changed names and focus. Also, page has been hijacked by a former employee. Kleubay (talk) 23:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Kleubay: - that sounds like an argument for bringing the article up to date (even if it's only a source clarifying that the company ceased operations/rebranded) rather than deleting. One of Wikipedia's principles is that if a company was notable once but no longer exists or has been renamed, the article should not be deleted but retained as a record of past events - that notability is not temporary. Can you clarify? Blythwood (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- advertorial content on a non-notable company. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:38, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect for the purposes of then analyzing the other company itself. ~~Delete~~ and I frankly consider this A7 and G11 material. SwisterTwister talk 02:31, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Delete Ad of a barely notable company. Millbug ^talk 03:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment/vote - @SwisterTwister:, @K.e.coffman:, I think it’s worth noting that this nomination for deletion is by the article creator @Kleubay:, who presumably has stayed working for this company through its rebranding and after its co-founder left. The company has now rebranded as Traction Labs (the website redirects too) and Kleubay has created an article on that brand name, which doesn’t seem to be notable either outside from a few passing mentions. My vote would be to delete both articles, but if we’re keeping the Traction Labs article (or consider both companies to collectively have scraped over the notability threshold) we should consider merging this content into that article. Pinging to seek comment on adding Traction Labs to this deletion discussion. Blythwood (talk) 11:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Traction Labs, and then consider the merged article at AfD. DGG ( talk ) 04:18, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am actually willing for this (thus I change my vote) as I concur this other company, Traction Labs, certainly seems questionable and there seems to not be any otherwise actually convincing information there. SwisterTwister talk 04:23, 6 August 2016 (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.