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 Richard Cavell 03:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greenplum[edit]

Prodded as a nn corp, and de-prodded by an anon. Removed from the new article bot's list of possible problem pages by creator. Large number of incoming links appears to be due to addition of the page to a template by DRady (talk · contribs). I don't really know my databases, so for all I know this one is very notable, but I smell spam. -- Vary | Talk 15:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I wouldn't call it spam: GP is fairly well-known within the Postgres community, and they've gotten quite a few mentions in the press (for example, their recent partnership with Sun: [1], [2], etc.). They are probably one of the more notable startups in the data warehousing market (along with Netezza and a few others). "Greenplum" gets ~146,000 Google hits. That said, the current article content is pretty poor -- it could definitely stand to be improved. (Full disclosure: I'm a Postgres developer, but I have never worked for Greenplum.) Neilc 08:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Most of the google hits are press-release type statements but their collaboration with Sun and subsequent adoption of their product have attracted external coverage by a handful of developer journals. Substantial VC investment, agree with the above comment that this is a notable startup in data warehousing market. Irene Ringworm 04:14, 22 March 2007 (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.