Talk:DailyCandy

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

This page should not be speedy deleted because...[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Cazer78 (talk) 16:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC) I am still working on this entry. Daily Candy was a pioneering tech and media company from the early 2000's. The reason I want to create a wikipedia entry for it is because there isn't a good central documentation of it online.[reply]

It has been written up in a wide array of noteable pblications

https://hbr.org/2009/10/dailycandys-accidental-entrepr.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/26/fashion/my-little-paris-newsletter.html?_r=0 https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB987003298184305157 https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/comcast-to-buy-daily-candy-for-125-million/ https://www.marketingsherpa.com/article/case-study/dailycandy-how-simple-viral-newsletter http://www.businessinsider.com/2008/8/comcast-buys-dailycandy-for-125-million-beats-out-viacom-for-newsletter-business https://techcrunch.com/2008/08/05/dailycandy-bought-by-comcast-for-125-million/ https://www.inc.com/magazine/20040201/howididit.html http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/03/how-nbcuniversal-killed-dailycandy.html http://www.refinery29.com/2014/04/65721/daily-candy https://www.recode.net/2014/3/27/11624998/nbcuniversal-owned-dailycandy-and-television-without-pity-will-be

Please be sure you use these sources in the article, as there is nothing to indicate how it's notable. If you want I can move this to a draft for you in the meantime? RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]