Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of Computers and Communications in Newfoundland and Labrador

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The result was withdrawn by nom. Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of Computers and Communications in Newfoundland and Labrador[edit]

Article consists of an ad for a self-published book with no claim of meeting WP:Notability. Contested prod. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While the book's notability is unclear, the topic is notable with abundant coverage by reliable sources, given Newfoundland's historical role as a communications gateway (cable landing points and cable stations, as well as Marconi's work with radio) between North America and Europe, and the complex history of ownership of telecommunications carriers in the province (the post office's telecommunications network in the days of the Dominion of Newfoundland was acquired by Canadian National when Newfoundland entered Confederation, and later became Terra Nova Telecommunications before it was sold to the island's dominant carrier; telephone service in the Avalon Peninsula was provided by Avalon Telephone, an investor-owned company that later became Newfoundland Telephone, then NewTel Enterprises, then Aliant). --Eastmain (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, if we delete out all the book advert stuff, there will be no article left. Any chance you can turn the article into a decent stub? If so, I'll happily withdraw the nom.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep That someone has written a book on the subject is a reason to keep, not to delete. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that it's a reason to keep an ad for the book, but I love the rewrite you did to the article. Great work, and I withdraw the nom.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:16, 6 June 2008 (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.