Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/ProjectInsight

Where is partiality in this article?'. Wikipedia entries need to be thoroughly documented by reliable sources and they can't have advertising purposes. But, by looking at the format, style and wording of the Project Insight article, I can't find any advertising claim but a purely descriptive short list of functionalities.

As an occassional teacher of project management, I have been exposed to several PM software systems for evaluation purposes, among them Project Insight. Obviously, I have to teach project management with mainstream software. In my modest knowledge about the subject, the list at List of project management software contains a great deal of marginal and outdated systems. Anyone who simply compares this article with several of the contained in the previously mentioned list, can find lots of advertising style and claims in other articles about project management systems. As a result, the list and articles should be either completely deleted, streamlined to the four or five more widely used, or kept open but requiring some sort of common sense in all its articles.

Therefore, it would be interesting to know what words or claims are considered not to be neutral.But we would also appreciate more effort from the writers of the article to mention reputable sources.

David Coloma.