Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PCS Revenue Control Systems


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 07:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

PCS Revenue Control Systems

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This is blatant advertising; it is an orphan page for a non-notable company with all "references" coming from the company website. A clear case of self-promotion. See similar: Volante Systems, PixelPoint. Timneu22 (talk) 23:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment It is not in the least "blatant" advertising. I think the lead also makes some significant notability claims. The claim that it is "clear self-promotion" would require that the article was created or heavily edited by someone affiliated with the company, which it is not. I agree that it needs some better sourcing, but your deletion rationale is a little over the top in my opinion. Beach drifter (talk) 01:15, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment As Beach Drifter has noted, and as I was about to note, it can't be "blatant advertising" when I have no affiliation with the company, and no one with affilation with the company has edited the article. User:PCHS-NJROTC (logged out because I'm having problems related to beta) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.128.156.14 (talk) 01:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Note that this is a food management technology company and producer of point of sale terminals and related devices and software based in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Its main focus is educational institutions' food service programs....  I'd say "cash registers for schools" would be a better way to put that, but what do I know? - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's original research, but I've heard of PCSRCS devices being used in non-educational settings such as hospital cafeterias and retail stores. If this were self promotion in violation of WP's policies, I'd have went ahead and violated WP:OR as well, but since I have no affilation with the company besides the fact that I've seen their products in use, it can't be self promotion as the deletionists are claiming here. However... what do I know? PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 03:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete non notable company, spammy article which read like a glossy brochure for the company RadioFan (talk) 19:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This article has a little better claim to notability than the other two. Still can't find any actual coverage to establish notability, but at least this company is listed with Hoovers and the Better Business Bureau - a Google search is not JUST company sources and Wikipedia. Still, no news coverage or recognition by reliable sources so doesn't make the cut IMO. --MelanieN (talk) 04:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment If this article is deleted (which it's looking like it will be), then the company's logo needs to be deleted as well. PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 14:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.