Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Persistent Systems (2nd nomination)

Add links
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. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent Systems

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Persistent Systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Uninformative advertisement for a global company specializing in software product development services. While the article claims that the business works closely with pioneering start-ups, innovative enterprises and the world’s largest technology brands, all I know about what they make or do after reading the article is that it must have something to do with computers. Only claims to minimal importance are listings on the Bombay and India stock exchanges, and references to petty trade awards and Top 100/500 lists of "Leaders", "Excellence", or "Managing Health at Workplace". Referenced to press releases.

Even if this business is notable, this article is entirely unhelpful, and presents no information that could be worked into anything better. Most Google News results relate to the stock going up or down. Deleted once at AfD (bundled: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reachwell Software Services Private), overturned at WP:DRV here, more recent AfD was closed as no consensus. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:11, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:13, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. What the nominator totally fails to mention in a totally inaccurate rationale is that the company meets WP:CORP by a big margin. This and this are already enough to meet the fundamental requirement of signficant coverage in non-local relialbe sources and are in no way press releases. The fully-sourced history section contains useful and relevant information, so the argument that the content isn't worth preserving (which goes against WP:Editing policy) doesn't hold water. More sources are easy to find, as a simple GNews search shows. Alzarian16 (talk) 19:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. WP:CORP addresses notability. Even if this business were notable, the current article is an advertisement that seeks to promote this business while telling us next to nothing about it. And one of your sources is indeed yet another press release announcing a petty IT-business trade award for "Innovation": Persistent Systems on Wednesday announced that they have won the NASSCOM Innovation award for 2008, in the market facing - business process and business model category. NASSCOM has recognised Persistent’s innovative mobile strategy.... The other is a press release based story announcing a routine deal. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 21:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have a seriously weird definition of what a press release is if you think that the Indian Express article is one, since it obviously isn't written by a member of the company but by an independent journalist. There's also absolutely no evidence that The Times of India story is based on a press release, and since when was taking over a company with 200 employees routine by even the strictest standards? As for the "it's an advertisement" argument... read the article again. Except for maybe half of the second sentence, none of the article actually promotes the company but instead describes it in a neutral fashion, which is exactly what it should do. Alzarian16 (talk) 10:49, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. NB -- I came here to better understand nom's thoughts, and how the community has reacted to them at other AfDs, given his comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GoldenSource. At that article he made a similar statement as to sources. I believe that Alzarian's view here is more in keeping with wp policy, and also don't understand nom's denigrating sources--without any evidence, or explanation other than what he tends to believe-- by calling them "a press release based story". We are within wp guidelines when we work with what we know that is verifiable, not with OR or what we tend to believe.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Perhaps other editors can address nom's concerns. Epeefleche (talk) 3:31 am, Today (UTC−4)
  • Keep 320 news results to go through, but it seems to get ample coverage based on its stock, and they talk to the CEO in places about the company. Thousands of people work for this company, so it must be large and profitable(yes, that does matter by rule of common sense). This company is clearly notable. Dream Focus 11:55, 28 September 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Persistent_Systems_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1069505104"