Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NayaTel

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. Nakon 05:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NayaTel

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

Promotional with nothing significant in WP:RS. Clear failure of WP:CORPDEPTH. Störm (talk) 17:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:09, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:09, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep' Notable telecom company and provider of FTTX. Covered in news refs [1]. Bad nomination -- Mar4d (talk) 07:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mar4d Company announcements, MoUs, namechecks don't come under coverage which is needed to pass WP:CORPDEPTH. Raise your standards for voting, 62% matches only?. Very bad. Störm (talk) 08:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Störm: Last time I checked, it wasn't me who's editing under formal restrictions on AfD nomination limits. You clearly need to revisit your source checking methodology and raise your AfD'ing standards:

Etisalat eyes takeover of local internet provider Nayatel

Bahria Enclave signs landmark deal with Nayatel

Undersea cable fault strangles internet services

Govt should strike balance between censorship, security: DRF

Nayatel Deploys DNS L-Root Server in Pakistan in Partnership With ICANN

All the news refs clearly mention it as one of the major operators. And you have clearly not checked news sources. Mar4d (talk) 08:56, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No need to lower the tone by making personal comments or bringing up editting restrictions that have zero impact on this AfD. Also it appears that you may not be familiar with the criteria for establishing notability as opposed to the criteria to evaluate sources used for incline citations. For example, articles based on company announcements or that extensively rely on quotations from company officers or connected personnel - essentially references that are no intellectually independent - fail the criteria for establishing notability.

Etisalat This tribue.com.pk reference relies extensively on quotations and comments from the Nayatel chairman with no intellectually independent opinion, fails as a PRIMARY source for the purposes of establishing notability, fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND.
This pakistantoday.com.pk reference is based on an announcement and is also a business-as-usual deal announcement, fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND.
This dawn.com reference is a mere mention-in-passing, fails WP:CORPDEPTH.
This nation.com.pk reference is a mere mention-in-passing, fails WP:CORPDEPTH.
[This thenews.com.pk reference is a based on a business-as-usual company announcement, fails WP:ORGIND.

Can you find any references that are intellectually independent? That don't rely on company annoucements or interviews/quotations from related sources? HighKing⁺⁺ 09:38, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete--Nah..Typical business-spam-sourcing.~ Winged Blades^Godric 09:04, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have you checked any references mentioning it as one of the major ISPs? There are only ten odd in the country, this is one of them. Please see above. Mar4d (talk) 09:05, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not RS. 2402:3A80:8C5:785F:F4BB:A87D:E98F:82BA (talk) 16:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is not RS? Mar4d (talk) 08:56, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it. It's a notable and major teleco in Islamabad and other major cities of Pakistan and a major competitor of ptcl. At present, article needs to be re-written, almost all subheadings contain non-encyclopaedic and intricate detail. I would say it'd be better to fix the article. samee ^talk 10:28, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing is major or notable about this spam article. 2402:3A80:8C5:785F:F4BB:A87D:E98F:82BA (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2018 (UTC) — 2402:3A80:8C5:785F:F4BB:A87D:E98F:82BA (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep it seems to satisfy WP:GN. I'll even put a friendly search suggestions template on the talk page.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 18:54, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. As it is mentioned in few media sources like the news[2][3], DailyTimes [4], Nation[5]. M A A Z T A L K 16:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep After looking at a number of possible additional references shown above, I want to 'keep' and improve the article. Ngrewal1 (talk) 15:54, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indications of notability, run-of-the-mill business with a run-of-the-mill news-production conveyer belt of PR releases, interviews, etc. None of the sources are intellectually independent and they fail the criteria for estblishing notability. Article fail GNG and WP:NCORP, references fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. HighKing⁺⁺ 09:38, 15 February 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.