Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Getit Infoservices Private Limited

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. ‑Scottywong | talk _ 16:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getit Infoservices Private Limited

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

The notability of the website of under doubt due to lack of RS. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 04:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not much notable, and yeah, upon search, lacks reliable sources too. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 18:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Quite a few RS's exist for the site, which show much more than just a mention. For instance, the New Indian Express speaks about the company's market in Kerala and of their purpose. Two more of them, both from The Hindu also report a similar thing, this time, their role in Tamil Nadu. It says that they launched their first classifieds service in Salem and Coimbatore. More info is also present in those two. Based on these results, I deduce that this is notable. Secret of success (talk) 05:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:47, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Secret of success; Google News throws up a small number of hits [1] but I suspect there is more news coverage in older (pre-2000) news sources because Getit has been publishing directories for a long time. Lynch 7 14:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The business is described in sales patter that's intentionally vague to conceal its banality: ....directional media company in India which connects buyers and sellers through information products and services. In other words, they make Yellow Pages styled phonebooks and business directories. No showing of significant effects on history, technology, or culture. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:43, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, article may not be in a good shape, but that's no reason to disregard its notability. IMO, the company is notable; much more so in earlier years than now. Of course, I'm in no position to actually improve the article, so if it can be userfyed, that would be better I guess? Lynch 7 15:38, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:16, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete i don't see extensive coverage to meet WP:CORP. LibStar (talk) 05:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NCORP. If not, then change the article focus per WP:ATD and then keep per WP:PRODUCT. Plenty of sources.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. -- Trevj (talk) 14:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete No extensive coverage on the net, erroneous statements in article and no concrete information in the wiki article.

prashantverma999 (talk) 03 June 2013 (GMT-6) —Preceding undated comment added 06:03, 3 June 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.