Talk:Nextiva

src: embedwistia-a.akamaihd.net

Video Talk:Nextiva

Inappropriate tagging

Duffbeerforme, I see that you tagged this article for speedy deletion. As the editor who accepted this AfC, I disagree with your edit. While it is obviously true that this editor has a COI, and while this article has been deleted and protected (probably justifiably, in the past), the article itself is now well-sourced and meets WP:GNG. I don't see any other problems with the article itself other than that, and if there are any problems, I don't see how deleting the article is necessary to address them. At the very least, you should do a regular AfD.

There'sNoTime, as the admin who unprotected the article, what is your opinion of this? --1990'sguy (talk) 01:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

1990'sguy, Did you bother to check the sources before accepting this advert? If so what were your thoughts on this one? Did it verify that "Yaniv Masjedi being the president of marketing"? How about this one? does it verify that Masjedi is the president of marketing (a position so important that it belongs in an encyclopedia)? duffbeerforme (talk) 07:31, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Duffbeerforme I don't see how there's a problem with the Phoenix Business Journal. And these articles,[1][2][3] among others, convinced me that this article is notable enough to accept. True, the blog and a few other sources are bad to cite, and if I had more time, I would revise the article to get rid of them, but I still don't think that a speedy delete is warranted. --1990'sguy (talk) 12:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Rehashes of routine PR announcements aimed at a local audience all from before the last afd where once again the article was deleted. The use of such sources as I linked is indicative of the sort of promotion that makes up this article, dud sources bombarded in to make them look more credible, Buckets of lipstick on a pig. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:56, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm still not convinced that the majority of these sources are unreliable and don't show that this article meets GNG. These are reliable publications, and the articles are written by their reporters (one of the articles was even written by the senior reporter of the Phoenix Business Journal). But I guess these arguments now belong in the AfD. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:31, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

"If someone wants to recreate it then asking an admin is not much of a burden compared to the amount of time that would be wasted in a 5th AfD" Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nextiva (3rd nomination). Pity not everyone listened. Source 1, "IDG Contributor Network" 2. "Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own." 3. covered at previous afds and drvs. 4. one simple quote from an employee of nextiva, no coverage of the company. etc. etc. See also this comment from Voceditenore on the article supposedly written by a "senior reporter of the Phoenix Business Journal" [4] "3.Brief announcement (5 sentences) of the company planning to hire more people (Phoenix Business Journal), unsurprisingly published the day after the press release at www.nextiva.com/news/2012-news-archive/business-growth-in-2012.html (can't hyperlink because nextiva.com is globally blacklisted)"duffbeerforme (talk) 14:13, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Maps Talk:Nextiva

Paid Promotion

This page is a ugly example of paid promotion bombarded with dud sources. It unfortunately exists because too may editors are willing to tell lies at afd to try to preserve this spam. How many people has their ceo paid to promote him and his business and to stack afds? Unfortunately due to a weak afd close this page still exists so I will clean it up a bit and remove some of the lipstick off this pig. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:37, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

So called key people. It have removed most of the names from the key people part of the info box. The likes of Vice President of Marketing does not belong there. These where just stuffed in to increase the citation count. The sources used were just passing mentions and provide no real content about Nextiva. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:44, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Social media. An employee making a generic statement about their internal control of social media does not belong here. This was just stuffed in to increase the citation count. The source used was just a passing mention and provides no real content about Nextiva. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:47, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

2017 Deloitte list. Nextiva was not place on the 2017 Deloitte 500 list as that list does not yet exist. See the bottom of the most recent afd. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:00, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

CEO. The source used to verify the CEO was just a passing mention with no real content about Nextiva. This where just stuffed in to increase the citation count. I've replaced it with a source that actually covers the company. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:15, 4 November 2017 (UTC)