Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transversal Corporation


 * 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. Mango juice talk 15:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Transversal Corporation
non-notable corporation. Been around for < 10 years, few google hits, no claim to fame or anything that passes WP:CORP - tried WP:PROD on this one first. Peripitus (Talk) 08:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I believe it should not be deleted, as Transversal Corporation has existed for 8 years (1998-2006) and is part of 'the Cambridge Phenomenon'.Djcmackay 08:13, 20 October 2006 (UTC) David MacKay
 * Keep - Why should a company have google hits to pass WP CORP?? Transversal has been featured in newspaper and magazine articles about the Cambridge Phenomenon. 'No claim to fame?'  How about 'a dot com company that is still going strong?' In my opinion, Wikipedia should be inclusive, full of factually correct content.  Deleting this article will upset me, and I'm a fairly hard-working Wikipedia contributor.  Why does Peripitus push for a slim low-content Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djcmackay (talk • contribs) 2006-10-20 08:46:12
 * Comment. You can't make two identical contributions to the debate. ... disco spinster   talk  12:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * My fault - I moved the first comment from the article's talk page... the second keep is his bit - Peripitus (Talk) 10:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. The article reads like spam, although they have won an award.  I can't find much more than that.  If there are newspaper and magazine references, they need to be stated in the article. ...  disco spinster   talk  12:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't want to make the article seem more like spam by adding 'transversal featured prominently in a Grauniad article about the Cambridge phenomenon', but for people who want this information, here are scans of the Grauniad magazine:

page2 page1 Grauniad Monday 29 November 1999.

Seriously, I think that it is worthwhile for some site on the internet to document what it is that makes for successful internet companies. In writing the article I was not trying to write spam. Rather, the point is: 'transversal are a success because they came up with an internet product whose value is similar in value to human staff, so companies are willing to pay for that product at a rate similar to human salaries'. If wikipedians genuinely don't want this sort of interesting information, where else should it go? Djcmackay 13:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC) D MacKay
 * Delete I don't see anything in the article or in a quick check of the company's Web site that would indicate that it meets WP:CORP. I'd be glad to change my mind if there is evidence to the contrary. ScottW 22:41, 20 October 2006 (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.