Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asia Tech


 * 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. slakr \ talk / 05:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Asia Tech

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability per WP:GNG and WP:CORP. Sources are primary and or trivial thus failing WP:RS. Ad Orientem (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to fail WP:GNG.LM2000 (talk) 00:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Please stop flagging this article by mistake. Certainly it meets minimum requirements. If you think it's not following rules, then why is this alike article still approved : Shahrad Network. For the record, what you do is not fair and it's based on your own personal taste. Asia tech is a well known nation wide Iranian company which does not need global attention. As you can see it has a page in Wikipedia Persian as well. Regards. Sa3er (talk) 10:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I can't comment on Shahrad Network since it didn't appear on my NPP queue. In any event that comes under the heading of OTHERSTUFF and is irrelevant. You keep saying it meets the guidelines but you are not demonstrating how. Please read WP:42. Best regards -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:33, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete From what I can see none of the sources on the Persian Wikipedia denote notability either, and realistically any secondary sources would be in Farsi. Wieno (talk) 04:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment What I'm saying is that what you do is not fair, cause none of ISPs listed on Category:Internet service providers of Iran have the requirement you're currently asking for, so they could get considered to be deleted as well. All resources on their pages are linked to their own website or some poor local website. Why don't you recognize Ripe.net and NetIndex as a qualified resource? After all, considering your past judgments on your talk page, guess that was just a bad luck to lay on your NPP queue! With all due respects. Sa3er (talk) 07:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep seems like a large business and there are almost certainly sources circulating in the Iranian print world that we don't have access to. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * 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) 02:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Re: Stuartyeates'... Unfortunately we don't operate on a 'seems like' basis. The motto of Wikipedia should be "show me the money," or in this case sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:45, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete The basic policy remains that we are not a directory. It is possible that none of the firms in this categry meet our requirements at this point, in which case there will be no articles either.  DGG ( talk ) 06:06, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm just really disappointed at Wikipedia to let guys like Ad Orientem easily ruin fundamental Wiki Foundation goals. Dude, I'm not even a user of that company and there's seriously nothing in it for me rather this articles gets approved or not. I was just shocked that such a famous and big Iranian ISP like Asia Tech was not even listed in Wikipedia English, while other not so well known and small groups like Shahrad Network and Sepanta are surprisingly approved and listed. If you still have any doubts you can ask your friends at Wikipedia Persian about the company legacy and how come they approved آسیاتک which is the Persian version. In the end, I think it's well said that : “Never argue with low people cause they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience”. It is just information, I have nothing more to say, do whatever you feel is right. Regards. Sa3er (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * First, nobody "approves" articles, and secondly please remember that civility is not optional. - The Bushranger One ping only 12:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Jeremy112233 (talk) 03:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 12:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Sources are partially primary, partially secondary, comprising indices (one by Ookla, for example) of varying ISPs. Rarkenin (talk) 13:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per DGG. We're not a directory and I can't find any sources that do other than list this company.  If there are sources in Farsi I assume someone will discover them at some point, and then the article can be recreated.  But given what's in there now, and, more importantly, what's NOT out there now, this company fails WP:CORP.&mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:15, 21 February 2014 (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.