Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neustar

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The result was nomination withdrawn. The sources provided by User:John Broughton convinced me that the company is most likely notable. It would be nice to have them actually integrated into the article, but at least this is sorted out now. (Closed by the nominator.) Keφr 20:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neustar[edit]

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

Incomplete nomination by User:Mikefromnyc, who gave the reason "page is advertising for a for profit company". I shall remain neutral, although I will note that the sourcing for this article does not look great, and the article does sound quite like an advertisement (in itself WP:SURMOUNTABLE, but we need sources anyway). Keφr 07:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:08, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:08, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KEEP. I don't see why this page needs to be deleted. The page provides accurate information about a company that provides some internet related services to enterprises and government and it's pretty good information too. It doesn't read like an advertisement to me. -Pavithran (talk) 17:20, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a good argument. Some third-party sources would be a good argument for keeping. And look at the "Business overview" section, written in vague marketingese. Keφr 18:54, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:17, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange with $620 million in annual revenues? If this is accurate it is hard to believe the company isn't notable and that there aren't articles covering it.. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:35, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then bring some. Keφr 06:41, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This company administers the North American Numbering Plan and is therefore a unique and key part of the telecommunications system of the entire continent. Here's news coverage from TheStreet.com about their Initial public offering. Shortcomings in the current version of the article should be addressed through normal editing, not by deletion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:15, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Frankly, I'm astonished that a deletion nomination is being made for a company that is on the New York Stock Exchange. The NYSE isn't where tiny, non-notable companies have their stocks traded. And if the article is too promotional, the solution is to delete that stuff. (To be more constructive, I've listed some sources - a matter of less than ten minutes looking through Google news archives - at Talk:Neustar#Additional sources.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:51, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. These look rather good. The businessweek.com looked a bit suspicious to me initially, but it seems to be just a formatting hiccup on their site. A few more sources and I withdraw this. Keφr 06:41, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've added some more sources. Also, I note that I've relied on memory a bit too much with regard to the NYSE - with its mergers in the mid-2000s, the listing requirements (minimum size of company) appears to have decreased substantially. Still, Neustar is large enough to be important, and - more relevantly - there are sufficient (IMHO) sources to support this claim. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:37, 13 September 2013 (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.