Talk:RealNames

message: from VfD:
Article fails to establish notability.  Referenced web page yields a 403 error, making verification difficult.  Company ceased to exist two and a half years ago. Uncle G 03:45, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
*Keep and fix. Realnames was a real company that tried to fix a real problem with trying to find information on the internet. It wasn't the biggest dot-com failure, but also wasn't the smallest. For a small bit of the background on the company, see . Verifiability is just a quick Google search away. gK ¿? 06:53, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *If you think that you can change the article so that it establishes notability, then go for it.  It doesn't as it stands, however.  And I note that your "quick Google search" turned up exactly the same single article about RealNames ceasing to exist two and a half years ago as my quick Google search did.  Is the criterion for notability here the fact that the company ceased to exist? There have been an awful lot of companies that fulfil that criterion. Come on!  Why was the company notable when it did exist? What did it do that makes it more notable than, say, InterGOV (which we decided wasn't notable)? Uncle G 17:49, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
*Keep, real company. Ashibaka tlk 07:07, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: *There have been lots of real companies in the history of this planet.  They aren't all notable, by a long chalk.  Can you expand RealNames so that it demonstrates why from amongst all of them this particular real company is worthy of mention, even though it no longer exists, in an encyclopaedia? It doesn't as it stands. Uncle G 17:49, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
*Keep. I remember these people - this was supposedly a big big thing during the dotcom era. --JuntungWu 10:34, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I don't know if these links will help this article but I am amazed that this has so little press when you realize how big a part of the internet it was, albiet for a limited time, with multi-million dollar investors like Microsoft and Verisign. 
*"Call 'em like you see 'em" By Penelope Patsuris, Forbes, 09/03/1999
*"If ICANN can't navigate Web politics, it might be time to replace it" By Dylan Tweney,Infoworld, 09/13/1999
*"Play the Domain Name Game" By Gene J. Riccoboni, The Industry Standard, 12/06/1999 
*"User-friendly alternative to URLs due soon" By Carolyn Duffy Marsan, Network World, 09/04/2000 
*"RealNames Tries an End-Around" By Reuters, in Wired, 11/15/2000 
*"Microsoft brings keyword search to UDDI" By Ashlee Vance, IDG News Service, 06/14/2001 
*"Multilingual domain name usage lags" By Carolyn Duffy Marsan, Network World, 07/02/2001
*"RealNames Simplifies Your Web Searches" By Ashlee Vance, IDG News Service, in PCWorld, 07/13/2001
*"VeriSign, RealNames push keyword browsing" By Stefanie Olsen, Staff Writer, CNET News, 10/10/2001
*"RealNames expands Web 'keywords'" in CNNTech, 10/14/2001
*"Did Microsoft destroy name-to-domain company?" By Adam Gaffin, Network World Fusion, 05/13/2002
*"RealNames' final keyword: Gone" By Margaret Kane, Staff Writer, CNET News, 05/13/2002 
*http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/05/14/realnames_shutdown_threatens_asian_naming/ "RealNames shutdown threatens Asian naming market"] By ComputerWire, in The Register, 05/14/2002
*"Fall of RealNames May Doom Internet Keywords" By Carolyn Duffy Marsan, Network World, in PCWorld, 05/28/2002
*"RealNames To Close After Losing Microsoft" By Danny Sullivan, Search Engine Watch, 06/02/2002 
*"VeriSign solves multilingual name dilemma" By Carolyn Duffy Marsan, Network World Fusion, 06/25/2002
159.83.196.33 (talk) 21:15, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: AHA! I was searching using Microsoft's "Bing" engine and found little but when I searched using other company's engines I found a lot of solid sources ... makes you say "Hmmmm?".  I have integrated the newly found links into the ones above. No problem of notability here, that is certain. 159.83.196.33 (talk) 22:11, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Helpful references ?