Talk:MinIO
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 24 October 2023. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
| This page was proposed for deletion by Mean as custard (talk · contribs) in the past with the comment: No indication of notability It was contested by Kvng (talk · contribs) with the comment: deprod, see talk for details |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Deprod
editThis is potentially notable as evidenced by: [1], [2], [3] ~Kvng (talk) 17:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
biased editing?
editIsn't there a wikipedia rule against editing an article you have some sort of vested interest in? It would appear several edits occurring May 5-6 were by a user named [Garima Kapoor], which is also the name of the Minio co-founder and CTO: https://minio.io/team/ If there is such a policy, these edits should be reverted by someone with more wikipedia chops than me. 2620:11E:1000:120:BDC7:ED2B:5E8F:3FF0 (talk) 20:55, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Article focus
editThis article is primarily focused on MinIO the software, rather than MinIO the company. I am not convinced that MinIO the company would be considered notable enough to be the focus of an article, but, if it is, a second article should be created for it, see for examples Elasticsearch/Elastic NV and Couchbase Server/Couchbase, Inc..
For this reason, I will roll back most of the good-faith edits by Ubiquitouslarry, which modified the intro and infobox to focus on MinIO the company. I would appreciate it if no further edits in this vain are made until further discussion on this talk page occurs. Note that the MinIO article already had some details about the associated company in a subsection, which could be added to if desired. Best regards Kiwi128 (talk) 21:14, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Advertising
editRight now a lot of this article reads as advertising, yet straight up removing it would basically make this article a stub. For example, the entire "Prominent users" section is just name-dropping.
What direction should this page go towards? Right now I'm having a hard time finding independent sources of any significance - I'm not sure it's notable enough to have its own article.
Is this an advertisement or information?
editWhile Minio is gaining traction in the OSS community, it's not that big still. Also the prominent users section is unverifiable. No companies listed have put out proof of their MinIO deployments as far as I can tell.
This page should probably just get removed wholesale. It doesn't benefit anyone, and all the stuff on here can be found on their website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.204.75.39 (talk) 12:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
This Wikipedia page is very useful to independent developers like myself
edit> It doesn't benefit anyone
I'm not sure why the above claim is being made.
It's not true from my perspective.
I and others I know greatly benefit from this page providing 3rd party (independent) summary commentary about MinIO, precisely because it's concise, thoughtful, and separate from the company's own official marketing pages. Personally I know nothing about the company behind MinIO, but I do know it would be a great shame if this article ends up being deleted :(
The rooker (talk) 15:37, 6 November 2023 (UTC): I have the same opinion. If any brand/product article should become biased or advertising on Wikipedia, it can be edited. I prefer to link to Wikipedia as object source about any product, if an article exists. Especially since MinIO is "not well known" (yet), but is currently one of the few FOSS-licensed and production stable Object Storage implementations available IMO.