Wiki143:Articles for deletion/Neotel

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, the people from SA say so, and they should know. It gets 100 google news hits in the last week so it's hard to argue with the media coverage angle. - Bobet 12:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Neotel

Template:Mbox New company, launched yesterday. Looks like a startup with hopes of becoming a major competitor to the existing telecom monopoly in South Africa. Most of their services won't actually be available until next year. Google for neotel "south africa" doesn't turn up much, mainly press releases (there are other Neotel's in multiple countries). At this point, they've got investors and a lot of plans. Seems to me this isn't up to WP:CORP yet, and is rather crystal-ballish as to whether it will become a major company. Fan-1967 13:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. The company isnt even offering any services yet, remains to be seen if they will become a major player in the region yet. If they ever meet WP:CORP and article can be created but as of now it does not. DrunkenSmurf 14:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment See below comments about it offering services: it is offering services. Re: "remains to be seen if they will become a major player in the region yet" -- that is not grounds enough to disqualify the article. Neotel holds significant economic interest to the region as well as being widely reported on by the media. There hasn't been a single 'advert' to my knowledge from Neotel, just dozens of press articles. Rfwoolf 17:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

It is too grounds for deletion. Otherwise I could write an article on the bodega on the corner; it is most certainly offering services, and it "remains to be seen" whether they'll grow to rival 7-Eleven.♥ «Charles A. L.» 18:36, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Advertisement. Sparsefarce 16:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Dozens of independant press articles (see below). Rfwoolf 17:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per nom. This company is notable because it is the first non state telecommunications network, and just because it happens to be new doesn't make the page an advertisement.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tertrih (talk • contribs) Note: First edit from new user.

• Comment "per nom" is an abbreviation commonly used here to mean agreeing with the nominator. I don't think that's what you meant. Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button File:OOUI JS signature icon LTR.png located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. -- Fan-1967 21:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Delete, borderline: is it crystal ball gazing when they're launching but not providing services? I don't think jumping the gun is always a bad idea, but here, it seems as if they should provide some nominal services first before they get onto Wikipedia.-Kmaguir1 08:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Following the end of AT&T monopoly in the US 20 years ago, Sprint and MCI were formed to compete. So were a whole bunch of other companies that failed and have been pretty much forgotten. We'll need to wait and see on this one. Fan-1967 14:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Surely it should qualify as an entry because it is both newsworthy and because it will provide coverage of an event that is in progress? Furthermore it does offer some services that have not been rolled out to the public yet. I can completely see the logic involved that would outlaw all businesses from having an article on Wikipedia because that would be tantamount to advertising. But this business holds significant national and regional impact on both the economy and the telecommunications industry. It may not have properly launched yet, but a wide cross-section of the public is aware of it because of the press. Rfwoolf 17:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, The company or corporation has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself. The company is already in business, however they are not yet dealing directly with the South African public (these services will be available in April 2007), currently wholesale international bandwidth is being sold to ISP's and other enterprises. Furthermore they will become the first company other that Telkom to offer fix-line access to companies/consumers in the South African market (a market that is currently heavily over-priced due to Telkom's monopoly). In addition to that this company represents the liberation of the South African telecommunications market. If this page is to be deleted, I recommend deleting the Telkom page as well.
  • For more information on Neotel and what it represents visit Hellkom or MyADSL and their external pages, namely [1] and [2].
  • Note that the name "Neotel" was only announced on 31 August 2006, before that it was known as "SNO Telecommunications", their website is still operational at [3] --Cs007 10:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC) Note has no edits outside this AFD and their user page.
    • Comment Telkom is a company that has long existed and is already providing service to millions of people. Whether Telkom is a horrible monopoly is irrelevant. Neotel is not even up and running yet. Wikipedia is not for promoting new ventures. Fan-1967 14:06, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment "Neotel is not even up and running yet." this statement is wrong, please see [4] or [5], Neotel is already providing bandwidth/services to MWeb, Internet Solutions,MTN, Vodacom, Cell C and Transtel.
        • Comment Neotel's been operating under a different name for the past year, and as mentioned previously. --Cs007 14:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
          • Per those links, SNO has been operating since December, offering limited (and somewhat unspecified) broadband service. Fan-1967 15:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree that strictly speaking in terms of being a company it doesn't seem to be up to WP:CORP standards yet, however in terms of being a historical landmark for the South African ICT market, doesn't that justify staying (I do however believe that the article is still fairly incomplete) ? --Cs007 15:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, Do NOT delete the Neotel entry. It complies with at at least one WP:CORP criteria: "The company or corporation has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself.". Click here for one news source. Neotel will also have economic impacts on the economy of the Republic of South Africa because it will completely change the telecommunications industry. Finally, last I heard Wikipedia was an encyclopedia; I specifically searched for Neotel to find out facts about the company, and the only reason I was ever aware of the company was because of its extensive coverage in the independant media -- NOT in an advertising context (see link above). As a South African, I am adament, the article has got to stay! Rfwoolf 17:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Last I heard Wikipedia was an encyclopedia, not a list of every corporate entity in the world.♥ «Charles A. L.» 18:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Forgot to sign♥ «Charles A. L.» 18:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Keep. I might have voted for deleting it if I didn't believe that this article will just be recreated in a few months time due to increase in information and interest in the company. Currently it is borderline but I expect it to expand. SumDude 16:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC) Note: First edit from new user
• Keep: The company can be considered notable primarily due to its political interest to South Africa. Because of notoriety of Telkom, the subject is controversial and thus interesting. However the article should follow very strict NPOV, remain factual and keep in mind that the company hasn't really proved anything yet. It will be a good idea to focus on the historical facts (related to the establishment of the new company) rather than the services or products of the new company. Errantkid 07:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep — Regardless of the company's future fate, they represent an important landmark in South African telecommunications. --Piet Delport 11:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep - I use Wikipedia regularly to either make sense of terms I don't understand, or to get some basic information about organisations / people that I have been hearing about and want a 'factual' update on. I am not aware of the various policies and guidelines referred to above, but the vast media coverage it has been garnering over the last many days prompted me to check the info on Wikipedia - and the current entry gave me a quick basic overview. I also understand that the company, being the second operator in South Africa, breaking decades of monopoly, represents a historical landmark - enough for the President of the country to comment on its launch. I think therefore, that the entry should be retained - any material discerned as 'advertising' must of course be removed. 196.207.40.213 00:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Ditto. G.A.S 06:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

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.