Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GlobalLogic (2 nomination)
Appearance
- 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 redirect to Hitachi#GlobalLogic. Despite the relist, no sourcing presented to counter claims that there exists no coverage beyond non-notable business activities. Goldsztajn (talk) 01:38, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- GlobalLogic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nonnotable outsourcing business. Only regular PR, not a word about the essence of business. Nothing to say, I guess. --Altenmann >talk 19:17, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and California. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:30, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
- Redirect (not merge) to Hitachi#GlobalLogic – There is a lot of routine coverage of expansions, acquisitions, and mergers that do not count towards notability (see WP:CORPTRIV). The first ten pages of a google news search didn't turn up anything that would establish notability (nor did the first three pages of a books search). More subjectively, GlobalLogic has had no significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, etc. PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 08:08, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: I'm making this post as part of my work for Beutler Ink, on behalf of GlobalLogic. I have disclosed my conflict of interest on the article's Talk page and my User page. This article was proposed for deletion in 2011 and the result was to keep it. At the time, editors found adequate sources demonstrating notability. Some of the links in the prior discussion are now dead, but I am looking to see if I can find archived versions. That said, since 2011, GlobalLogic has continued to receive coverage in reliable sources: eWeek (discussed in 2011), The Hindu (March 2024), The Hindu (November 2024), The Times of India (December 2024), The Economic Times (2024), The Times of India (January 2024), The Economic Times (2023), The Economic Times (2015), MINT (2018), Silicon Valley Business Journal... There are plenty more, largely in Indian based business news. In LexisNexis, I'm getting about 600 results for newspaper articles that mention GlobalLogic, and will continue to look through for in-depth coverage. While frequent coverage is routine, given the past result was to keep the article and that there is still sustained journalistic interest, it makes sense to keep the article and improve it, rather than delete it. Given the limited engagement so far, I suggest at least relisting to give more time for research and discussion. Cheers, BINK Robin (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:47, 20 March 2025 (UTC)- Keep: The India Times coverage is non-trivial. – yutsi (talk) 03:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- If you are referring to what is known as The Times of India, it is not considered a reliable source, see WP:RSP. Aneirinn (talk) 16:37, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: The India Times coverage is non-trivial. – yutsi (talk) 03:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Delete.Redirect to Hitachi#GlobalLogic – Per WP:NOTADVERT. This article is entirely dependent on routine WP:DOGBITESMAN coverage and press releases. It reads like it is just a list of its acquisitions. This company does nothing and is not notable. Aneirinn (talk) 00:34, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
- 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.