Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't know why it was deleted but, most likely, the article didn't meet the required standards. A good article about DO should have no problem staying up (if notable enough).


I wrote exactly what I went there wanting to know about DO. If you think you could contribute better words, please help the sandboxed version

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Niels_Olson/DigitalOcean


By standards I also mean the notability standard. Being a business that's doing well is not enough.


SSD in the cloud, Linode is just now trying to catch up. I would not expect a wikipedia editor to understand how RPMs of spinning platters in the cloud is not novel. Personally, I'm not a fan of DO but they did push SSD in the cloud while MSFT Azure is still justifying (and recently lowering their price for)their 5400RPM drives.

I don't expect an encyclopedia to include everything that ever existed, but the mere facts that people from across the world are googling Digital Ocean and discussing DO on more than just HN should necessitate an ENTRY into a free online encyclopedia. Why capture the history of a company when we can just edit/delete it? There are more important revisions going on.

Cynically but realistically, who is getting paid (or getting donations) to keep DO down?

Is the purpose of Wikipedia to educate and inform or retardedly (not my word) not have facts of the existence of a company that is a competitor to their fund contributors? DO is just a flash in the pan, like the DODO bird, but people still want to know what a dodo bird was.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: