Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OTT Middleware (2nd nomination)

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 delete‎. The arguments to delete are substantially stronger. The challenges to the posted sources have not been rebutted or overcome. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:35, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OTT Middleware

edit
AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

OTT Middleware (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)

Procedural nomination. This is a recreation, by the same author, of the article deleted at the first AfD two weeks ago. Changes are enough to evade G4, but I doubt the problems identified at the previous AfD have been addressed. Pinging all participants of the previous AfD: @UtherSRG, Alpha3031, Lamona, Goodboyjj, Z3r0h3r000, Mmarietaa, Maddy from Celeste, and REAL MOUSE IRL. Owen× ☎ 14:04, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 14:04, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Most streaming services are handled directly through the television or digital media player's own operating system, not this hallucinated explanation that somehow thinks the entire streaming service's billing and CMS is actually on the consumer device, which would not be a proper way to manage an application. This is simply an article which convolutes back-office functions somehow into a consumer's device. Nathannah • 📮 19:37, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify and SALT: Not convinced this isn't notable, but author refuses to use the draft space to work things out to where it is ready for main article space. UtherSRG (talk) 00:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not think your vote makes sense. You cannot technically say "SALT" if you are suggesting Draftify. From what I understand SALT means to protect the page from recreation. You should revise and remove the SALT part. Mmarietaa (talk) 09:44, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:SALTing is routinely used to force going through AfC, especially when the author is uncooperative. Owen× ☎ 10:25, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The alternative to SALT is to remove your main article space editing privileges and move privileges, requiring you to use the draft space. You don't want to go down that route. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:37, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion post my !vote have lead me to believe this just isn't notable, so consider my D&S option to just be an alternative to delete, which I now believe to be the correct choice. - UtherSRG (talk) 23:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep:This is a complete rewrite with better sources and 100% human-written, no AI. If you compare it to the previous version, the main issue raised was that it lacked citations and appeared to be AI-generated. These concerns have been fully addressed in the current version. Mmarietaa (talk) 09:39, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This topic is covered sufficiently in Streaming media. That article provides technical information; this one reads like a vague marketing blurb. Note that of the sources here, 1, 5, and 8 are marketing pieces, 3 & 4 are not about OTT, 2 is a mere mention. There does not seem to be enough to separate this technology from the discussion of streaming. Lamona (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    In case anyone is wondering about IT Wire, its about page reads: "About iTWire - Advertising, Sponsored Posts, Editorial, Press Releases, iTWireTV videos interviews and Outreach Promotional Posts." Lamona (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see any mention of Middleware in Streaming media. I see mention of OTT, but that is much different than "OTT Middleware." if you think that I am mistaken, please point out which exact sections talk about it. Goodboyjj (talk) 23:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I also don't find it in there now, so I was obviously looking at a different page (too many tabs open). It was adjacent to that page, conceptually; I apologize. However, I still don't see sufficient sources (nor sufficient text) to convince me that the middleware requires a standalone article rather than being included in another article, perhaps Over-the-top media service in the technology area. All of the sources that I find talk about it as a component of an OTT service, not something separate. For example, "middleware acts as the central nervous system of an OTT platform". I also only find product promotional articles on the middleware. Lamona (talk) 04:11, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This version is much improved from the last time. I voted keep last time and still vote keep based on these citations: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.Goodboyjj (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:55, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as sufficiently improved version from what seems to have come before and meets WP:GNG this time around. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Looking at the article refs:
    • 1 is a vendor's page and inapplicable to the notability question.
    • 2 cites academia.edu which is deprecated per WP:ACADEMIA.EDU
    • 4, a book, does not mention OTT in its glossary of terms or even its index.
    • 5 is another vendor's page
    • 6 looks reliable; I can't read the paper so I don't know if it's relevant.
    • 7 looks reliable if niche.
    • 8 seems OK

I did not read each reference in detail. I am having trouble downloading 3. I am very troubled that reference 4 seems to just be "thrown in" (perhaps by an AI to look good?). --A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 20:55, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(2) is on ACM, so it's reliable, but it only discusses a specific architecture: "VoDKATV, an IPTV/OTT middleware". It's not even specific to OTT. (6) doesn't discuss architecture at all. (7) is another version of (2). (8) is written by someone not in their staff directory and contains a spammy link to a commercial service. Probably a sponsored/promo piece. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:29, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to delete as there is just no good sourcing in the article currently, and there is a >50% chance this article was created for spam purposes.@OwenX did the previously deleted article cite wurl.com or lightcast.com? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:17, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No wurl.com or lightcast.com among the citations in the deleted version. Let me know if you want me to email you the last deleted revision, Helpful Raccoon. Owen× ☎ 12:42, 15 August 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/OTT_Middleware_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1307042466"