Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TechExcel Inc.


 * 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. Input since relist has only been in favor of deletion; article has shown no improvement since nomination. &mdash; Scientizzle 19:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

TechExcel Inc.

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Gnews search returns only three hits which mention the company; one is a press release, another appears to be a generic link to one of their whitepapers, and the last only mentions them in passing. This would not seem to meet WP:CORP. In addition, the person creating this page added it because they "resell their products", so there is some COI here. Mr. Vernon (talk) 14:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm must say I am surprised, TechExcel is a leader in ALM and has been 2 years running on the SD Times 100 list, as per here: http://www.sdtimes.com/link/34383 please let me know what else I need to provide? MaryMallone (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, no significant coverage in reliable sources. Lots of press releases, tho. -- Nuujinn (talk) 21:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Note that ALM, ITSM and CRM are "application lifecycle management", "IT service management", and "customer relationship management", yet another bit player in a crowded field.  Fits the profile of a Wikipedia spammer.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Again, how do you define "another bit player"? If you look in trade press for example in the ALM area then you will see that TechExcel is a leader in the area. MaryMallone (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * MaryMallone, you may want to review notability requirements, and policies regarding conflict of interest. I see that you are new here, and I'm sure you have the best of intentions--it is very difficult to write an article and get it accepted if you're not familiar with policy. If the article is deleted, by all means feel free to request that it be put into your userspace for additional work or time required to get the article in good shape. Please feel free to post any questions on my talk page. -- Nuujinn (talk) 22:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Dear Nuujinn, I did look at both the Notability and Conflict of interest articles, and on the notability I most of the 3rd party sources on TechExcel is relating to specific products so I opted not to use them as that would be in my mind very commercial and on the conflict of interest then I deliberatly kept the text on both the company and products simple and generic to make sure it would be objective. MaryMallone (talk) 10:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, well you see, what you need is to find some references such as reviews that cover the company in some depth, or references that show the company has won a significant award. Absent significant coverage in reliable sources, notability is not established. -- Nuujinn (talk) 23:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  22:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

http://www.issue-tracking-software.de/
 * Delete There is no assertion of notability. This reads as nothing more than a directory entry. &mdash;gorgan_almighty (talk) 14:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep There are enough substance and webpages about the company, I have used the software in several previous companies. Some links:

http://codicesoftware.blogspot.com/2008/05/how-to-use-plastic-scm-and-bugzilla-ii.html

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/06/prweb4083084.htm

http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/192204989;jsessionid=XKN1TNM0G3HWJQE1GHPSKH4ATMY32JVN

RJsweden (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC) — RJsweden (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment This is the user's only contribution to Wikipedia. Also, of those references: the first is a list of software in this space, the second is a blog entry on using the software, the third is a press release.  The last is more of a product review than anything else.  --Mr. Vernon (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. The quality of this article put it on the early stub category. However, I have checked google, gnews, gbooks, gblogs and I could find numerous references for this company. As a personal note I have also checked their web-site and they have an impressive lengthy list of awards throughout the years (awards can be a little deceptive but it is an indication nevertheless...) http://www.techexcel.com/news/awards .Perhaps our inclination to deletionism and the fact that MaryMallone indeed has a COI with the company make us avoid to see the obvious - that this company is indeed notable. I would suggest to give the author the opportunity to improve the article. Pxtreme75 (talk) 19:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment By all means, have a go at improving the article. I'm not finding the awards all that impressive: one of one hundred companies or projects that have influence, one of 5000 fastest growing companies, one of 500 largest companies by revenue, and this list. -- Nuujinn (talk) 20:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 06:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * Relisting Note: Normally, this would be closed as delete with this discussion, but the recent comments merit a little more discussion in my mind, hence the relist. Courcelles (talk) 06:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, insufficient notability, also considering what has been put forward by the SPAs of this AfD. Haakon (talk) 10:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per nom and Haakon. Codf1977 (talk) 21:00, 20 June 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.