Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intellum, Inc.

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2011 December 20.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 delete. v/r - T P 16:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Intellum, Inc.[edit]

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

No assertion of notability per WP:COMPANY; no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Filing Flunky (talk) 13:14, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Filing Flunky (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Can't see any basis upon which it can be said that the company is sufficiently notable. --Legis (talk - contribs) 08:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that the companies are not equal, but if this company is not notable, I don't think Cornerstone_OnDemand is.. nor are many others. The page specifically cites an award the company won, as well as coverage from industry research firms indicating notoriety.

--Medra42 (talk) 20:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's nothing in the article yet explaining why the company is notable, and I can't find much online about it (under the new or old name) from independent sources, nor about the award from the Brandon Hall Group. The Cornerstone OnDemand article, on the other hand asserts endorsements (with references) from three notable tech research companies, and a quick search on Google News yields a great deal of coverage of the company and their product from independent sources. Both articles are rather short at the moment, but can be expanded. Can you find more in-depth coverage of Intellum from WP:Secondary, WP:Reliable sources online showing why it's notable (which is not necessarily the same thing as famous), or are there paper press clippings that you could scan and upload? Please let me know if I can help with this. Thanks, Filing Flunky (talk) 07:56, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bersin & Associates, Brandon Hall Group, and 37signals references do indicate that the organization is notable. They're independent sources and, in the case of the first two, are substantial, verifiable independent research organisations. The PRWire references are less substantive than Cornerstone's, but still valid & notable in the industry.

--Medra42 (talk) 14:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Another software and services company advertising on Wikipedia. This one makes learning management systems. "Management system" ought to be a criterion for speedy deletion. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising on Wikipedia? That's a rather overly-optimistic view of the effect a Wikipedia page has for traffic, profitability, etc... Why ought "Management system" be criterion for speedy deletion? You don't think it's worth knowing about?

--Medra42 (talk) 14:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:CORP. Nothing notable about it. And yes, it is advertising since WP articles get listed near the top on Google searches. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 16:04, 19 December 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.