Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rally Software

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. WP:CORP/WP:CORPDEPTH. j⚛e decker ^talk 02:31, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rally Software[edit]

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

Several questionable references, narrowly fails WP:CORPDEPTH, but most importantly a grossly promotional tone that would require a complete overhaul to be encyclopedic. Deprodded by user with disclosed COI. While I'm uneasy with this, disclosure of the COI shows good faith and I don't think it should be an issue except insofar as the promotional tone of the article may be attributed to COI. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 02:22, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 00:15, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom and WP:SOAP. It's an appalling piece of bum fodder. All that's missing is a link to E-trade. It's traded on the NYSE, but it is not an encyclopedic article, and WP is not a PR platform. SW3 5DL (talk) 04:30, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ. This is a page consisting of factual, referenced company information. The company is traded on the NYSE, but in no way does this page solicit or attempt to be anything but a factual reference page. Is this any different than IBM, Volvo, McDonalds or any other company reference page? TPG (talk) 19:40, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. Could change if the company gets more attention from financial analysts etc. --Boson (talk) 23:01, 4 July 2014 (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.