Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet Security Alliance

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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Internet Security Alliance[edit]

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

Appears to be largely promotional but maybe not speedy. Very little news coverage. possibly fails notability criteria. Polargeo (talk) 17:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let's Keep it, there are hundreds of Google News hits, 166 Google Books hits, and over 100 Google Scholar hits. Since we keep things that have 2 non-trivial sources, the nominator has not explained away these hits, and nobody else has commented, keeping seems the best choice. Abductive (reasoning) 21:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I've removed most of the promotional copy. Abductive's news hits are a bit misleading, some are to generic "internet security alliances", many are to press releases, most are passing mentions. But the president, Larry Clinton, has recently been giving evidence to a senate committee,[1] and they've got some other coverage in the tech press:[2][3]. Fences&Windows 20:41, 29 November 2009 (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.