| Revision as of 05:26, 20 January 2006 editAaron Brenneman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users19,683 edits →[]: d← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:40, 20 January 2006 edit undoMONGO (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers76,644 edits →[]: keepNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| * '''Keep''' per Tony Sidaway, though the article could some more editing/NPOV. <span class="user-sig user-Quarl"><i>—] <sup>(])</sup> <small>] 03:56]</small></i></span> | * '''Keep''' per Tony Sidaway, though the article could some more editing/NPOV. <span class="user-sig user-Quarl"><i>—] <sup>(])</sup> <small>] 03:56]</small></i></span> | ||
| *'''Delete''' as not encyclopedic. Article did get a nice couple of paragraphs in an eleven page article in Wired ten years ago... but anything else? I'm not seeing evidence that is satisfies ], and the use of the words ''"The company claims to have..."'' are sending up some serious ] warning flags to me. - ]]] 05:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' as not encyclopedic. Article did get a nice couple of paragraphs in an eleven page article in Wired ten years ago... but anything else? I'm not seeing evidence that is satisfies ], and the use of the words ''"The company claims to have..."'' are sending up some serious ] warning flags to me. - ]]] 05:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' but expand soon.--] 06:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:40, 20 January 2006
Tally Solutions Ltd
Bangalore-based Accounting software company that is one of two or three giants, and probably the leader of those, in its home market. Numbers among its customers half a dozen illustrious names including two auto companies, the Reserve Bank of India, and the Indian software giant Infosys. Fairly well known in the UK market, also sells into the Middle East and Far East.
I undeleted this a couple of days ago after what I regarded as an inadequate AfD: Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Tally_(accounting). The reason to delete was that it looked like an ad and the company had less than 500 google hits. Well that's silly but the article did need overhauling, which I've done.
I'm relisting this because there seems to be some concern about my unusual action in resurrecting a deleted article.
- Obviously keep. We don't delete articles about this kind of company without a very good reason. Misplaced Pages isn't some silly bloody game, it's an encyclopedia. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 03:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per above. KrazyCaley 03:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per Tony Sidaway, though the article could some more editing/NPOV. —Quarl 2006-01-20 03:56Z
- Delete as not encyclopedic. Article did get a nice couple of paragraphs in an eleven page article in Wired ten years ago... but anything else? I'm not seeing evidence that is satisfies WP:CORP, and the use of the words "The company claims to have..." are sending up some serious WP:V warning flags to me. - brenneman 05:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep but expand soon.--MONGO 06:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)