Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quality monitoring

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD 8 July 2005 19:37 (UTC)

[edit] Quality monitoring

Text used with permission, badly named discussion of quality monitoring in call centers, not-encyclopedic, delete--nixie 3 July 2005 00:26 (UTC)

• This is a copyvio (see page now). It requires deletion, but it has already been reported to Wikipedia:Copyright problems. -SocratesJedi | Talk 3 July 2005 04:23 (UTC)
  • No, its not a copyvio, see the talk page.--nixie 3 July 2005 04:25 (UTC)

Since it says they retain the copyright, I'm not sure it's GFDL compatible, but IANAL. Niteowlneils 3 July 2005 05:33 (UTC)

• Delete. Copyvio or not, this comment from the talk page explains why it reads as it does: "I removed all mentions of Mercom to make this an informative article and not an advertisement." Um, it's still a bunch of 'biz school 101'-ish hype for a technology/process, just no longer attached to a specific company. Not particularly encyclopedic tone, overly broad name, kind of a mix of POV and original research--in other words, even if there is an encyclopedic topic buried in here, AND it's not already covered under a better name (redirect suggestions are welcome--I'm just too dead (and disinterested in the topic) to go a-huntin' at the moment), I don't see anything salvagable here--better to let someone start fresh. Niteowlneils 3 July 2005 05:33 (UTC)
• Delete While perhaps educational, not encyclopedic. --Alex12 3 3 July 2005 09:13 (UTC)
• Delete - with headings such as "The Impact to Your Business" (I don't have a business....) indicates the contributor has not made any effort to tailor this into an acceptable format. "Quality Monitoring" has more definitions than just within call centres, so apart from the question of copy vio, it's also overly POV. Rossrs 3 July 2005 14:41 (UTC)
• Delete, not encyclopedic and the comment on the talk page says that Mercom retains copyright in anycase! It doesn't belong in Wikipedia... UkPaolo 3 July 2005 20:04 (UTC)
• 'Redirect to something more relevant, like Quality Assurance. Merge whatever can be merged. --Maru
• Delete not encyclopedic, promo. JamesBurns 4 July 2005 00:38 (UTC)

• delete. Advertising marketroid-speak. Robinh 4 July 2005 12:04 (UTC)
• Delete, in agreement with the above comments. Oliver Keenan July 4, 2005 22:02 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.