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 keep. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 19:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Planview[edit]

Planview (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)

Non-notable company, fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:02, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.siliconhillsnews.com/2015/05/22/planview-acquires-troux/ http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/blog/techflash/2015/05/software-maker-planview-hires-chynoweth-as-cfo.html http://groundreport.com/gartner-positions-planview-in-the-leaders-quadrant-of-the-magic-quadrant-for-it-project-and-portfolio-management-software-applications/ http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/charting-your-it-career/projects-planviews-no-matter-how-you-work-approach.html http://www.virtual-strategy.com/2015/06/22/planview-demonstrate-benefits-applying-lean-and-agile-principles-project-collaboration-du#axzz3durUoOeE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewjohn39 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 (Talk) 14:48, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:LaMona FYI, I don't know User:BiH and the reason I am commenting on the articles created by him is because I read long discussions on his talk page where he also mentioned pages created by him and that are now nominated for deletion because of notability issue. I am only putting evedences of notability and I feel that whoever nominated these articles had not reviewed the references himself and it was a biased decision to nominate them for deletion. Andrewjohn39 (talk) 18:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Except that there is no such discussion on his/her talk page -- and that was easy to check. And how one ended up on such a talk page would need explaining. So I'm still dubious. LaMona (talk) 15:47, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't help if you have a doubt but be assured that I don't know him...I accidentally landed on his page while reviewing a page created by him and then I went through all the discussions. Apart from this, I am only presenting the fact and doing nothing else..if you don't agree, present counter argument rather than blaming!! someone nominated pages for deletion because he thought that subjects are not notable..I am just trying to prove that nominations were wrong!! Andrewjohn39 (talk) 19:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr\ talk / 12:01, 7 July 2015 (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.
More