Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nogoom Masrya

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. Once the paid editing issue is done with, we still have an article that meets notability standards and edits that were not done through paid editing. (non-admin closure) Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:03, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nogoom Masrya[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Apparent undisclosed paid article, sources appear, as far as Google translate goes, to be press releases. Guy (Help!) 17:49, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

weak Keep. I'm puzzled why it should have needed to be paid for- - it seems notable enough, and the sourcing is adequate for subjects of this nature. DGG ( talk ) 03:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:22, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep One the biggest sites in Egypt and 849th biggest in the world according to Alexa internet traffic page. Yes, the article is a stub but appears the site is quite popular. ₪RicknAsia₪ 02:40, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:38, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If this had been caught early on, I probably would have agreed to speedily delete the article for undisclosed paid editing. But enough attention has been given to this article by more neutral editors. I admittedly cannot read most of the sources, but have enough understanding to know they are reliable and help pass GNG.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Not only undisclosed paid editing, but sources are from press releases and promotional stuff, and none of them appar to be from reliable news sites. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2018 (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.