Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remedy Corporation: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 22:34, 1 February 2021

Remedy_Corporation

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is a very old page, about a corporation that was acquired and stopped existing 20 years ago, in 2001. The References and External Links are old and redirecting, or in some cases defunct. For example, ARSList ended in 2019, and Remedies for Remedy hasn't existed for quite a long time. The only recent changes to the page seem to be spam addition of https://www.softwareadvice.com/resources/remedy-software-guide/ by a suspected sockpuppet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sedgedorrit. Wattssw (talk) 12:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Once notable, always notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:25, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What is a problem here? Being old and defunct certainly is not a valid deletion rationale. Pavlor (talk) 06:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per many reliable independent sources covering the topic from multiple points of view, absolutely passes WP:N, no questions asked.78.36.163.169 (talk) 07:04, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is no Remedy product anymore, no Remedy website, no Remedy groups. All external links on the page are defunct, the recent reference is spam from a sockpuppet. The page would need to be cleaned up and would then be considered a stub. Wikipedia isn't a historical log of every company that existed. This is a not-notable relic from the past. Wattssw (talk) 19:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no virtue in deleting the article. There is still a Remedy product - it is the Action Request System and it is currently sold by BMC. There are still active user groups and customers. I can try and clean it up (I haven't paid much attention to it in a while), but, since Wikipedia is not paper, I feel we are richer with this article than without it, if only slightly. -Armaced (talk) 22:34, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 * '''Strong keep''' per many reliable independent sources covering the topic from multiple points of view, absolutely passes [[WP:N]], no questions asked.[[Special:Contributions/78.36.163.169|78.36.163.169]] ([[User talk:78.36.163.169|talk]]) 07:04, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 *'''Comment''' There is no Remedy product anymore, no Remedy website, no Remedy groups. All external links on the page are defunct, the recent reference is spam from a sockpuppet. The page would need to be cleaned up and would then be considered a stub. Wikipedia isn't a historical log of every company that existed. This is a not-notable relic from the past. [[User:Wattssw|Wattssw]] ([[User talk:Wattssw|talk]]) 19:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
-*'''Keep''' I see no virtue in deleting the article.  There is still a Remedy product - it is the Action Request System and it is currently sold by BMC.  There are still active user groups and customers.  I can try and clean it up (I haven't paid much attention to it in a while), but, since Wikipedia is not paper, I feel we are richer with this article than without it, if only slightly.
+*'''Keep''' I see no virtue in deleting the article.  There is still a Remedy product - it is the Action Request System and it is currently sold by BMC.  There are still active user groups and customers.  I can try and clean it up (I haven't paid much attention to it in a while), but, since Wikipedia is not paper, I feel we are richer with this article than without it, if only slightly. -[[User:Armaced|Armaced]] ([[User talk:Armaced|talk]]) 22:34, 1 February 2021 (UTC)