Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helpdesk and incident reporting auditing

Helpdesk and incident reporting auditing

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article reads very much like an opinion or essay. Believe it fails WP:NOTADVICE and WP:ESSAY. I work in this field and this article isn't encylcopedic Gbawden (talk) 09:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but it does need references and a rewrite. So does Help desk. The two should be done together, with the former being a main article for a section in the latter. Aoziwe (talk) 13:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:56, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete In its unsourced state it's just a vague woffle of essay, not an encyclopedic article. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:55, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
delete Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Until it has references, that's all this article is. I don't think we should keep it on the off-chance that someone will fix it. ubiquity (talk) 18:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This does appear to be a notable topic: [1], [2], [3]. Article can be improved to address WP:ESSAY and WP:NOTADVICE concerns. ~Kvng (talk) 22:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:50, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I'm not saying that it is of no value, just that this is a HOW-TO guide and not an encyclopaedia topic. Shritwod (talk) 10:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]