Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CPCS Transcom Limited
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. The Nordic Goddess Kristen Worship her 00:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- CPCS Transcom Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This was listed for speedy deletion, but the article creator contested the tag, so I'm bringing it here for more input.--Aude (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Clearly notable, award winning business operating in more than 80 countries. I have added citations to demonstrate notability. This article was CSD'd a minute after its creation and was then taken to AfD just two hours later, despite additional edits by the page creator. Please give article creators time to establish notability before taking a new article to deletion. Baileypalblue (talk) 22:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It is difficult to imagine a more wiki-worthy organization than CPCS Transcom, please check the website of the company. --Mr Accountable (talk) 07:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Comment At company site, looking at 'Projects' and selecting 'Africa', there are very many serious projects CPCS is involved with, I would have to put down what I am doing to start to list them properly in presentable article format; Africa, Latin America/Caribbean, Asia, there are over two dozen listings each of which is quite complicated in and of itself, article-wise. Privatization of the Port of Cotonou, for instance, would lead to an important section of article Cotonou. There's not much trivial, casual or simple material to develop with regard to this topic. As I am in the US, on inauguration eve, I don't have the wherewithal to start with this at the moment. Please just leave a tag on the article, as each of its many projects is notable, notability easily comes from project topics themselves, this company is like a think tank. --Mr Accountable (talk) 07:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Comment Checking through pages 1 to 13 on a google search:cpsc transcom, I see 130/130 topic results, checking page 20, 22, 26, 10 topic results a page, each one seemingly a different government agency, university or company. 3 or 4 of these links have been added to the External links, so notability is not an issue. --Mr Accountable (talk) 07:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)Comment 130 usable references on 13 google search pages, aren't users supposed to try and fix the article before applying a deletion tag? --Mr Accountable (talk) 07:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, weakly, though it would help a lot if the article's description of what this business does — international infrastructure development firm specialising in private sector participation in transport, power, and urban sectors — could be translated into English. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Like how? Isn't that the raison d'etre of the Simple English Wikipedia? --Mr Accountable (talk) 15:57, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I find the current text problematically vague and at an inappropriate level of abstraction. "Infrastructure" potentially refers to too many things to be a helpful description. "Private sector participation" could be stated in more concrete terms. And what the devil are "urban sectors?" The broader the brush a business uses to describe its activities, the likelier you are to encounter peacock phrases, glittering generalities, buzzwords and pointy-haired boss talk. I want to know the specific kinds of projects these folks get involved in. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Urban sectors" had already been copyedited to "urban transit and property development". --Mr Accountable (talk) 22:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- But here's a question: given the slowly shifting nature of the company's portfolio of projects, how does one create 3 effective lists of company activities, one for each geosector? Each project, albeit more or less wiki-notable on its own, will drift off of the company's site lists in a reckoned 24 - 36 month time frame. --Mr Accountable (talk) 22:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But I will go ahead and start to create lists of the projects these folks are involved in anyway.--Mr Accountable (talk) 22:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Struck through because I am not sure when I am going to do this task. --Mr Accountable (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Urban sectors" had already been copyedited to "urban transit and property development". --Mr Accountable (talk) 22:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I find the current text problematically vague and at an inappropriate level of abstraction. "Infrastructure" potentially refers to too many things to be a helpful description. "Private sector participation" could be stated in more concrete terms. And what the devil are "urban sectors?" The broader the brush a business uses to describe its activities, the likelier you are to encounter peacock phrases, glittering generalities, buzzwords and pointy-haired boss talk. I want to know the specific kinds of projects these folks get involved in. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2009 (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.