Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FCS Computer Systems

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. czar 15:12, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FCS Computer Systems

edit
FCS Computer Systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The two book references look serious but are actually as trivial mentions as you can possibly get. Then we have:

  • 3 and 4 - routine directory listings
  • 5, 6 and 9 - primary sources
  • 7 - news about the company getting some industry certificate valid for six months
  • 8 - article about a product made by the company which says nothing about the company itself

Overall the company falls short of the notability standard set out in WP:NCORP. Rentier (talk) 00:57, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 06:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 06:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 06:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 06:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is beneficial to Wikipedia and Wikipedia users to retain this article. Manc1234 (talk) 14:28, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have several apps there myself. Does that mean I should be in Wikipedia? Rentier (talk) 14:44, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If they are commonly used and it would help the general public to find out more about their developer, yes! Manc1234 (talk) 15:29, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If the apps are very popular, why there is so little coverage in secondary sources? I strongly disagree that we should be looking up apps in app stores in order to establish notability of the developer. Rentier (talk) 15:37, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if this sounds like I'm being contrary, but in 2017, mobile apps are a major point of contact for people and real world businesses.
I understand that app stores have a lot of junk on them (https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/01/apple-is-going-to-remove-abandoned-apps-from-the-app-store/). And Google Play store is even worse as it has less curation. But where it's connected to a legitimate business I think the existence of an app shows notability. Manc1234 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Verifiability is not the same as notability. --Bejnar (talk) 19:03, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- an unremarkable software company; nothing stands out about it. Just a company going about its business; such content can just as effectively be housed on the company web site. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:13, 7 July 2017 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/FCS_Computer_Systems&oldid=1137839692"