- 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. postdlf (talk) 15:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- ACCPAC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article contains only unreliable sources and is written like an advertisement. Alpha Quadrant talk 02:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and rewrite ACCPAC was a very popular backoffice accounting package, most widely known as the version by Computer Associates, CA ACCPAC. [1] 65.93.12.101 (talk) 05:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The references currently in the article aren't the sort of thing that would make this a notable product. But if this software has been in continuous use since the CP/M era, it might have the kind of longevity that would make this significant enough to warrant an encyclopedia entry. The historic names of the software might be better candidates than the current name. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 13:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - The dreadfulness of the article and the references can be fixed. ACCPAC is/was a very popular accounting package for small to medium sized businesses. Examples of independent sources: [2], [3], [4], [5]. -- Whpq (talk) 19:32, 23 March 2011 (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.