Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nepal Internet Exchange (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus. MBisanz ^talk 17:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal Internet Exchange[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Since the original AFD, closed for No Consensus, the article hasn't been worked on or been have any references or sources added to it. A cursory look through Google does not reveal anything to show it meets WP:GNG. Clarkcj12 (talk) 09:20, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 09:20, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 09:20, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 09:20, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable enough in itself for an article but suitable for a limited partial merge to Internet in Nepal (which also needs massive cleanup). --DanielRigal (talk) 13:21, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it seems historically significant (thus making it highly likely that it is written about or will be written about in works on IT in Nepal) and per Wifione in the previous AFD. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:51, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:52, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The sources indicated in the previous AfD are reliable. I also found a few reliable sources which talk about it: [1], [2] and [3]. With those, the article is good enough to pass WP:NWEB. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:55, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Agree with the above users that it should be kept with the fact that more sources have been found. Oshawott 12 ==()== Talk to me! 06:05, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and containing "Independent Content". None of the Keep !votes above appear to have taken NCORP criteria into account - we require more than references mentioning the organization in reliable sources. The references (including those mentioned in the previous AfD) fail the NCORP criteria. Also, the vast majority of these types of organizations are listed in [List of Internet exchange points] and do not have articles. For example:
- This from Nepali Times is entirely based on an interview with Bill Woodcock who is involved in the Packet Clearing House and assisted in setting to the IEP in Nepal. There is no "Independent Content" and this reference therefore fails WP:ORGIND
- The paper Problems and Prospects of Internet in new e-Nepal (also available on sci-hub) mentions the organization once, in passing, and fails WP:CORPDEPTH.
- This article on telecomkhabar.com fails as a reliable source. The website appears to be a "portal" with no indications of any editorial oversight, no list of editors or who the "owner" is, also has a facebook page with no details and finally the article itself was posted anonymously with no attributed author. Reference fails WP:RS.

None of the references in the article or posted at the other AfD meet the criteria for establishing notability and having searched, while there is no doubt that the organization exists, I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability and therefore this topic fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:28, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the references might not confer notability, but I'd say that being the only internet exchange in an entire country militates toward notability more strongly than that; and since references have been found that seem in all respects to have established the existence of the thing, I think they ought to be included and the article left to roam cyberspace. jp×g 17:08, 28 November 2020 (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.