Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Relic
- 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 keep. It looks like this AFD has fallen through the cracks. I see a consensus to Keep this article. Liz Read! Talk! 03:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- New Relic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I checked thoroughly through the 100's of sources and the only one that stood out was:
The others were about routine acquisition, CEO nomination, raising funds. Such statements are also the bulk of this Wikipedia article, so I do not see it fitting on the encyclopedia. It has not received much, if any, significant retrospective in secondary publications besides its support to anti gay company (see above). But this amounts to just a small gossip in the grand scheme of things. That's why I do not see this topic meet the WP:NCORP guideline, (which is more stringent than WP:GNG).
To add, article was created by @Billhodak, Sr Director of Product Marketing at New Relic. (https://newrelic.com/pt/blog/authors/bill-hodak) बिनोद थारू (talk) 04:24, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. बिनोद थारू (talk) 04:24, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet, Software, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Strong keep I'll start by saying New Relic is a pretty old and well-known monitoring product so my presumption is that it'd be notable.
- Sources that don't seem to in the article but I think would count toward WP:NCORP so clearly meets it:
- Employment surging in Portland tech, uses New Relic as their model company for that article
- Silicon Valley start-ups find second home: Ireland another article (that was widely syndicated) that uses New Relic as their main example company
- Red Flags Emerge in Technology Valuations, pretty detailed coverage of issues with their valuation, along with another company.
- Inside the $6.5 billion buyout of New Relic
- New Relic Sued Over $6.5 Billion Sale to Francisco Partners, TPG
- Focus: How two private equity firms negotiated New Relic deal down to $6.5 billion
- New Relic part of a directory of interesting tech companies but pretty detailed coverage for the length.
- It's also a very common product for books/documentation about setting up websites mention and describe how to use. Examples: [1], [2]
- Coverage in books beyond simple setup instructions: [3] "New Relic could be considered the granddaddy of SaaS monitoring tools, chances are that if you are a developer you will have heard of New Relic." And: The Linux DevOps Handbook. Can't see a full preview of its section but the book talks about NR's financial situtation and how covid-19 impacted it.
- There's more but I think those plus the set of good sources in the article make this a very strong keep. The article should probably be trimmed a bit but that can happen without deletion. As for who created the article, probably could have been done with a better disclosure but it was successfully submitted through the AFC process back in 2011 so I think that's not very relevant anymore. Skynxnex (talk) 15:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with above meeting NCORP, so I agree to retract nomination (if allowed). I did not manage to sift well enough through the sources on Google in addition to the current ones, most results seemed promotional or routine. Upon looking again at corp criteria, what you mention above is an instance of A news article discussing a prolonged controversy regarding a corporate merge and An extensive how-to guide written by people wholly independent of the company or product ([4]). बिनोद थारू (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: I agree with the nom, most are routine business announcements. Source 15 is more about the (negative-ish) company culture that existed, so can help build and article, but the rest are regular business goings-on. Oaktree b (talk) 15:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep: The premise that New Relic, of all things, isn't noteworthy is absurd. I'm a corporate consultant, and it's a standard tool on my current project, and because of that a recruiter just sent me ANOTHER requirement using it (which is why I was on the article), and I've seen it on previous ones as well. It's definitely noteworthy. Nominate Crystal Reports for deletion, next. — Kaz (talk) 18:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep: Obviously notable.
- Gartner APM MQ leader [5] (sorry for linking to their material, but I don't have access otherwise).
- Forrester report [6].
- Publicly traded company for 9 years.
- RS coverage NYT Barron's
- Arguably even their private equity acquisition was notable given troubles and ongoing coverage [7] [8] . A412 (Talk • C) 21:55, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep There are sufficient detailed analyst reports available (some linked to above) which meet the criteria for establishing notability as per GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing++ 14:15, 7 December 2023 (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.