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 no consensus. Can always renominate later if the article is not, in fact, fixed. Shimeru 09:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Software Companies in India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Wikipedia is not a directory. Joe Chill (talk) 01:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unmaintainable --Sodabottle (talk) 04:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

keep, I think we can improve the article, like removing non-notable software companies names, only keeping notable companies name.KuwarOnline ^Talk 07:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As per nom. Ditto for the rest. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is what Category:Software companies of India is for. utcursch | talk 07:37, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. I guess lists are the new BLPs. When I previously suggested pages similar to List of software companies in Mumbai, I meant it to be a point against deleting it. There are other similar pages like List of corporations in Gdańsk, List of corporations in Poznań, List of corporations in Pittsburgh, List of corporations with a major presence in Birmingham, Alabama, List of corporations based in Winnipeg, List of corporations based in New York City, List of companies of Ireland, List of companies of the People's Republic of China, List of companies based in Bradford, List of companies based in Leeds, List of companies based in Leeds, Newcastle University spin-out companies, List of companies based in Newcastle upon Tyne, List of historical British telcos, List of companies of Canada, Foreign ownership of companies of Canada, List of Canadian insurance companies, List of Canadian mobile phone companies, List of defunct airlines of Canada, List of airlines of Canada, List of Canadian telephone companies, List of technology companies in Richmond, British Columbia, List of defunct Canadian railways, List of technology companies in Ottawa, List of technology companies in Montreal, List of Canadian electric utilities, List of airlines of the United States, List of Alabama companies, List of Alaska companies, List of Arizona companies, List of Arkansas companies... I could go on, but this is enough for now. Lists are essentially different from categories. Agreed, the list in question reads more like a category than a list article, but that is nothing that cannot be fixed. The topic in itself is adequately notable--^Nilotpal42 11:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I am not against the principle of the article, but looking at a random selection of the lists you mention, they are all manageable. The article under AfD is an uncleanable mess. I tried to cleanup the red links only to find there was no alphabetical ordering, making it really hard to find the blue links out of the red ones, and by doing so I discovered duplicate entries (that's what happens when it's not alphabetized). As many of the notable companies are not Indian in the first place, there would need to be sources to establish their presence in the particular cities where they are listed. So we have at hand an unmanageable, unverifiable article. Deletion is the most reasonable option, with no prejudice on recreation of a manageable, properly sourced article.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This of course is intended to be limited to the ntabler ones. Therefore it is intrinsically not a violation of DIRECTORY, which would include them all. The redlinks shou.ld be removed after a time is given to seeing which of them may be notable. DGG ( talk ) 00:54, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep but cleanup as in delete all the red links and external links per WP:EL, WP:NOTDIR. In fact, I shall do that right now. ETA: OK, I might be more inclined to delete as there needs to be sourcing for the presence of some of these companies in India.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 13:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - attempted cleanup is not worth it, it's easier to start from scratch. Too many red links, no ordering, no sources. I tried.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 13:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - going over the blue links left, there is still a whole lot of lack of sourcing for notability and verifiability. Thus I am still leaning towards delete.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 21:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - as per nom Codf1977 (talk) 14:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Week Keep - Now the list consists of only companies with WP articles then I think it should be kept. Codf1977 (talk) 10:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep(Has already !voted above.) Allow me some time I will remove all non notable companies. If you guys give me time then let me know on my talk page. I will clear all non notable companies. KuwarOnline ^Talk 17:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

well the AfD will probably be open for another few days yet so you have some time. Codf1977 (talk) 17:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep , per DGG and Nilotpal42. Subject is clearly notable and the problem of the terrible proliferation of red links can be solved by editing, therefore deletion policy asks us not to delete. --Cyclopia^talk 00:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep No valid reason to delete. Shyamsunder (talk) 10:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Wikipedia is not a list. Neither relevant sources are given.--Kkm010^as© 15:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It is not possible for every company to meet the standards and get listed on Wikipedia. That does not mean the company does not operate. List of India IT companies simply means that the person looking for IT company in particular city either for service or stats can get it easily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.131.107.130 (talk) 05:07, 28 January 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.