Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamco

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Enough significant coverage in reliable sources distinct from myki. Whether it looks like an advertisement is irrelevant. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kamco[edit]

Kamco (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Speedy delete queried by the following discussion in my user talk page. It was also marked for delete with {{Copyviocore}} as a suspected copyvio of http://www.kamco.com.au/myki.html . Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:44, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just wondering why you deleted the Kamco entry. It is not only a registered company in Australia but is quiet often in the headlines in Victoria, Australia. There was some referenced material not copyrighted that was deleted. Why do people spend time updating this only to have Admins delete it. Disappointed and still confused why. Signed 'Insider' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.27.69 (talk) 09:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC) [reply]
    • Page Kamco looks a lot like advertisement to me. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:51, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Having a heading of "Controversy in Victoria" would not appear to be an advertisement to me (which was all referenced). I would like to request re-instatement please. Still disappointed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.27.69 (talk) 10:02, 8 March 2011 (UTC) [reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:51, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, most of the detail should be in the myki article, but Kamco should be kept as the place for contract info like my links above. "myki" is the name used by the Transport Ticketing Authority for the smartcard system, whereas "Kamco" is the prime contractor (like TranSys and the Oyster card in London). The state could apparently replace Kamco as supplier and redesign myki without changing the name. That possibility is being investigated right now: Deloitte has prepared a confidential assessment that is currently being reviewed by the state Treasury. This is a big deal: the original 12-year contract to develop and operate the system was for AU$494 million, expenditure to end 2010 was AU$790 million and it is now being called the "troubled $1.35 billion ticketing system", which would be AU$245 for each man/woman/child who lives in Victoria. Keane (company) may have a short article but it is a subsidiary of NTT Data who turned over US$13.7 Billion last year. - Pointillist (talk) 00:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Kamco is generally more well known in Australia than the parent company.
  • This company has been active for further smart-card systems which will not be called Myki due to ownership of the name sitting (I believe) with the Department of Transport/TTA.
  • Kamco is currently being taken through the courts by Metcard and whilst it is Myki related, is more related to Kamco itself.
  • Newspapers: There are two main newspapers in Victoria where Myki is available. "The Age" has 285 online entries for "Kamco", the Herald-Sun has 54 according to Google search as of March 10th.
  • Now that the blatantly copied Myki advertorial section have been removed, the article can grow organically. This is difficult to do with the copyvio and deletion messages peppered throughout the article as it puts off new editors.
  • In twenty years, the Kamco experiment in Victoria will still be relevant and topical. There will no doubt be changes in the consortium through time through mergers and acquisitions. Longevity of this entry should be assured.
  • I would suggest (but cannot verify) that most Melbournians would know the name Kamco. Few outside the industry would know Keane

202.161.27.69 (talk) 20:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: User Johanna Waldon (talk · contribs) (identified online as the "Communications Advisor at Kamco") turned the page into spam in January. It showed up in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam a couple of days ago, so I studied the page history and rolled everything back to the version prior to Waldon's edits (diff), but user 202.161.27.69 (talk) complained about that on my talk page so I self-reverted. There seem to have been two groups of anonIPs editing it post-Waldon, some removing unflattering information à la Waldon, others adding it back in. – Athaenara ✉ 19:42, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 00:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep again, because:
  1. I blanked the "like an advertisement" material on Feb 28 (diff) well before this AfD, because it was copyvio. Unfortunately I didn't remove the {{advert}} template, and perhaps this was what precipitated the current AfD.
  2. I still have work to do about sourcing but reliably-sourced criticism has been so easy to find that the current article could never be considered to be in Kamco's favour.
  3. Sources for the contract at vic.gov.au are being taken offline, and Kamco is the only article where sources are being archived via webcitation.org. If Kamco is deleted, the links to archived sources will disappear.
  4. It seems that the myki project will continue even if the contract with Kamco is terminated. If the Kamco article is merged into the myki article, the material about Kamco will be buried and perhaps eventually lost because they are no longer the contractor.
  5. Kamco is only a small part of Keane, which is a small part of NTT Data. If the Kamco article is merged into the Keane article, the material about Kamco will be buried. Wikipedians from the state of Victoria are unlikely to watchlist Kamco's American and Japanese holding companies.
This article is nothing like an advertisement. In fact the main effect of deleting it would be to help Keane do news management around the myki debacle. - Pointillist (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2011 (UTC), updated 07:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
you cannot !vote twice. LibStar (talk) 04:43, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete most of the coverage relates to myki not the company itself, take away myki and you don't have much of an article. LibStar (talk) 04:47, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't want to !vote twice, of course, but I do want to emphasise that the article has been substantially rewritten since it was AfD-nominated (diff). There are now seven more references and the majority of them are specifically talking about Kamco's role in myki, which has not been covered properly in the myki article – and would not be maintained there if it the two articles were merged. - Pointillist (talk) 00:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. - Pointillist (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. - Pointillist (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. - Pointillist (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Have any of the delete !voters actually read the sources? This and this are directly about the company rather than just mentioning them in passing, and would certainly seem to meet the guideline over at WP:SIGCOV. Two reliable regional/national sources offering significant coverage is enough to meet WP:CORP, regardless of what some essay says. Alzarian16 (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Several articles that do not have enough notability have few websites pointing out to them, but essentially why does this company deserves to have an article within Wikipedia? It is a subsidiary, it is responsible for myki, but everything that is contained in Kamco article, is already written in myki's article, and also its owner article is very small. The company itself is not notable and I have made a research about it, because it is known as myki, not as Kamco, if the company had a variety products it would be notable, this is a case of WP:1EVENT. Eduemoni↑talk↓ 19:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:1EVENT applies only to people, not to companies, otherwise this would indeed be a concern. As far as I'm aware the presence and quality of articles about the system and the company's parent are irrelevant to whether or not this article should exist, at least as far as policies and guidelines are concerned. As for why they deserve an article... well, blame whoever wrote WP:GNG and WP:CORP, both of which they meet. Alzarian16 (talk) 20:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Kamco is a household name in southern Australia and have been in discussions with other state governments. The Victorian government has already committed 1.3bn AUD and as a cause celeb in removing the previous state government, deserves a place. It is not only a IT shop, it changed the political party from left to right in Victoria. 101.109.93.1 (talk) 16:00, 22 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kamco&oldid=1087632183"