Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IT Service Management
- 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 of the debate was nothing to do here. An AfD debate isn't needed to merge something. Mackensen (talk) 16:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
IT Service Management[edit]
We don't want individual articles for all the various parts of the Information Technology Infrastructure Library, do we? The encyclopedia would get rather messy if it had articles for every vocabulary term that was defined by any notable government standard. -- Beland 22:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge/Redirect this page back into Information Technology Infrastructure Library. But we probably will have individual pages because of the impact *COUGH*endless, time-sucking meetings*COUGH* this will have on business processes. ;-) — RJH 16:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge I agree with RJH. Merge the wikilinks to IT Infrastructure Library.
- Merge them all, and dewikify the page before someone goes and creates more nn/copyvio articles. Stifle (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ITSM and ITIL are quite different in scope. Proof is in previous frameworks developed by many vendors and the effort undertaken by OGC in the ITIL 'refresh' to play catch up. ITSM is a valuable, separate topic. Separation would allow ITSM to mature as required by the market and ITIl along qwith any other best practice framework offering, to position accordingly and make its case for consideration. ITIL is NOT ITSM.--Itsmi 22:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Charles T. Betz Agree with above. I am going to start being more active here getting this mess straightened out. The more experienced Wikipedians are within their rights to want more clarity, but the suggestions are way off base. I have added a substantial new intro. Charles T. Betz 20:39, 28 May 2006 (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.