Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intellicus Technologies

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Intellicus Technologies[edit]

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

Disputed prod. Non-notable company - fails WP:CORP. Ghits amount to no more than press releases and listings/directory type websites. Also still littered with marketingspeak. ukexpat (talk) 15:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- ukexpat (talk) 15:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- ukexpat (talk) 15:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- ukexpat (talk) 15:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Unambiguous advertising: The features of the product include Browser-based Adhoc Reporting designed for business users and decision makers, an interactive DHTML-based PowerViewer for Business Users providing them with drag-and-drop feature, Pixel-perfect reporting with Web-based Studio for Designers which is a zero foot print component, Personalized Dashboards for a unified view of the enterprise performance. Again it "leverages". Fits the profile. And appearance in a "Top 100" list rather argues against notability than for it; really this is an organization with no minimal claim to importance. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. How comes we have all these articles on top XXX companies from Red Herring, but which hardly have any other coverage about them? Smells fishy. Pcap ping 16:23, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - G11 speedy deletions are for articles that would need to be totally rewritten to remove the advertising. I believe that with this article, it wouldn't require an extensive rewrite to bring it in line with WP:NPOV. But regardless, it clearly doesn't meet our notability criteria so it's best to delete it. -- Atama頭 17:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:A7 speedy has already been declined. – ukexpat (talk) 18:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Company doesn't satisfy WP:CORP standard of notability (the only distinctions seems to be the 'Red Herring 100 Asia finalist 2008' and shortlisted in 'NASSCOM IT Innovation Award 2007', which are not sufficient). The article is unambigious advertisement, which is not surprising given that it is largely a copyvio of the company's press release. Arguably speedyable, but may as well let the AfD run its course now that it has started. Abecedare (talk) 04:25, 13 February 2010 (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.