Talk:Pansophic Systems

This belongs as a page but I don't have enough material

Pansophic Systems had an identity prior to its acquisition by CA Technologies in 1991. I believe it likely deserves a page of its own for its up-to-1991 existence, but I can't prove it.

• Chi Tech has a couple paragraphs citing its growth from 1969 to 1991 with nearly $300 million in sales.
• Joe Piscopo has similar content.

Thisisnotatest (talk) 05:24, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes it definitely could be its own article. For additional sources see the Martin Campbell history of the software industry, the Piscopo oral history interview by Haigh, articles in Computerworld such as this one and this one, stories from newspapers such as this one, and so forth. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:44, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Created. :) @Thisisnotatest and Wasted Time R: Feel free to correct any glaring mistakes I might have made, as I am still something of a dilettante when it comes to mainframey stuff. DigitalIceAge (talk) 19:33, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Fast work, impressive! I've added some material on Easytrieve and made a few other minor changes. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:51, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 03:27, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that when the founder of Pansophic Systems tried to return to the company, he was rejected? Source: see fn 2 in article
  • ALT1: ... that Pansophic Systems was among the first wave of independent software vendors in the late 1960s? Source: see fn 2 in article
  • Reviewed: TODO Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Wilkins QPQ now done Wasted Time R (talk) 00:35, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Comment: lost track a bit of filing this nom, will do the QPQ shortly

Converted from a redirect by DigitalIceAge (talk) and Wasted Time R (talk). Nominated by Wasted Time R (talk) at 10:51, 2 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Pansophic Systems; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• General eligibility:
• New enough: - possibly not
• Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Wasted Time R: Good article. But, this does seem to have been nominated 8-9 days after its creation so I wonder if it's still new enough. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:28, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

@Onegreatjoke: Thanks for doing the review. Yes, I goofed and missed the nomination cut-off by one day. Whether to let such misses slide by is generally up to individual reviewers; I have approved cases like this a couple of times in the past. Looking now in WP:DYKSG, I see that rule D9 speaks to this, saying The "seven days old" limit can be extended for a day or two upon request (the second part of D9 doesn't apply here, because I am not new to DYK). But it's really up to you. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:59, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

I guess it's not too big of a deal. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:30, 4 June 2023 (UTC)