- 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 delete. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- 123Net (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Internet Service Provider and voice/data product company with limited claims to notability per WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Current content of the article is a company history. None of the listed sources mention the company except two related to some of its recent acquisitions. This piece from The Oakland Press provides some depth, but it amounts to local coverage about the company, mostly relating to its acquisitions. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 09:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The substantial majority of the "references" don't even mention the company, let alone support the statements in the article to which they are attached. Of the three that do mention the company, one is a wayback machine archived copy of an advertising page, one is a press release on a press release publishing website (the site's own description of its service:"we’ll help you optimize your press release with the goal of being picked up by major search engines"), and the other is the Oakland Press article mentioned above. I concur with I Jethrobot's assessment of that article. My own searches have failed to produce any independent coverage at all: that one local newspaper article seems to be it. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:23, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The article does not establish anything beyond local notability in a reliable way. Jncraton (talk) 17:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:52, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - does not establish any notability beyond the local notability established in the Oakland Press atricle. Fails the general notability guideline. Chris (talk) 00:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Another local ISP. No showing of significant effects on history, technology, or culture. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - My opinion upon reading this article and checking the references also leans towards 'delete', but I worry about being too hasty. It could be argued that this article has enough EV to be worth keeping around, especially since it's not like publishing costs are an issue. If this article read like an advertisement rather than a history lesson, I would strongly support its removal or total overhaul, but the style is pretty much what one expects to find in an average wikipedia article. The historical information about the company just might be useful in the future to someone who might google "123net" or type that into wikipedia in the future, whether its for some sort of research, for legal reasons, or anything else. I agree, though, that there are major problems with the references (like #6, which is a link to a "download linux free" page and isn't really a reference at all) and that the other issues regarding notability have merit, which is why I am withholding a direct 'vote' and instead voicing this comment. Spiral5800 (talk) 13:15, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I believe that this may achieve notability if rewritten around Linux System Labs which at one time was a significantly player in the physical distribution of Linux media (95-97 timeframe), I believe. See [1], [2] and [3]; they later got sold to http://shop.cheapbytes.com/ apparently. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:20, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Website founded early enough to meet the List of websites founded before 1995 criteria, probably. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- delete not sure that website is proven that early Stuart? Otherwise seems entirely non-notable. --Joopercoopers (talk) 01:34, 22 November 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.