Talk:CommuniGate Pro

Changed or re-wrote to be non-advertising

I re-wrote the page based on information I could find about the software. I also added some references I could find. However, I wanted to ask the admins if the way it is now is fine before I waste a lot more time on it. If it is still not fine, can somebody please give me an example or idea about what to put on the page so it becomes legitimate? Or what should _not_ be on the page. I tried to use a neutral stance in the description. Marsaro (talk) 14:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Notability and referencing

I see a lot of mail systems present in wikipedia and wondering why CommuniGate PRO was not. The software is widelly diffused and has a strong community. For instance compared to Axigen has something like 20.000 site installation and more than 140 milion users active worldwide!

We would need sources. Read WP:N - if you can proove the 140 million users, the it would be a different story maybe. Kotiwalo (talk) 09:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

On the corporate website there is plenty of information, if you look at http://www.communigate.com/carrier/references.html you will note Tele2 that by themself cover something like 13 milion mail user. Also case sudies can be usful as a proof http://www.communigate.com/carrier/casestudies.html Award received are here: http://www.communigate.com/carrier/accolades.html please let me know if more information are needed, my idea is to expand the voice to make it more usefull I was only starting with few information. Massimobolzoni (talk) 10:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I have inserted the stub tag to explain it is not complete. Massimobolzoni (talk) 13:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think we need to see some more independent references and reviews used to source the content of this article. As it stands it could be deleted at any time. Stuff from CommuniGate's website, like the "case studies", is not independent and I am very unimpressed with some of their "awards". The pages linked just list a shedload of different products. Other stuff linked might be usable but I think the notability is pretty marginal. I am going to add a few more tags and see how things develop. Others may not be so generous. This article has been deleted so many times that it is likely to be treated with suspicion by the admins. The best way to avoid deletion is to get some decent independent references on it ASAP. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I remember this being deleted in the past for references not being included. I tried to help then, but it seems I was not understanding what was needed. I added some reviews, and will wait to see what others say about those, if they are the type that are good references or not. I found a lot of publications discussing that product, but did not want to put too many there until the discussion is more supportive of the info I found. It should not be too hard to find something as that product is something like 20 years old. Marsaro (talk) 12:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Article name

Please name it Communigate Pro (not PRO)! 194.87.2.99 (talk) 12:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

OK. I have renamed it to "CommuniGate Pro" as the capital "G" seems to be correct and that is the name it was deleted under about a dozen times in the past. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Expansion then cleanup is needed

If there's company history available, this needs to be added.

Once history is established for introduction, possibly list products and services.

RorWiki (talk) 15:04, 18 April 2011 (UTC)