Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Invensis

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:58, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invensis

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

A nonnotable outsourcing company Staszek Lem (talk) 23:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article has reliable sources and it fully complies Wikipedia's requirements for company notability, which says that the company must be "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself or listed on ranking indices of important companies produced by well-known and independent publications." The company has been featured in a case study originally published by Ivey Publishing (from The Ivey Business School) in 2008 and later by Harvard Business Review. Also its Managing Director was featured in an interview published in CIOL.com about his experience in managing the company. The company has also been listed in three industry rankings. In two occasions (2008 and 2011) as one of India's Top ITeS and BPO Companies published by Dun & Bradstreet (a major business information corporation). Also it was ranked once among the top 10 most promising Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) organizations in India by Silicon India, one of the most important IT media in India. So the company has independent publications for both requirements. All the sources mentioned above are included as references in the article. Any feedback to improve the article is welcome. JM Salamanca (talk) 06:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) — Jmsalamanca (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Objection. Please see Wikipedia's significant-coverage and independent-sources guidelines. (They're summarized at WP:42.) I haven't paid to buy a copy of the case study; it could easily be a reasonable source. But an interview might easily not be considered "independent". Also, rankings don't always help to prove notability; we want to see enough actual paragraphs of text describing Invensys, not entries in a ranking table. I know it's frustrating; but, instead of trying to force your company into Wikipedia, you should spend your time on providing useful products and services, and growing your company, until someone unaffiliated decides to write a Wikipedia article about the company. Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 03:24, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 14:59, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Company does not meet WP:CORP.-- Dewritech (talk) 15:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Self-promotion of NN company. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 22:32, 11 August 2013 (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.