Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ETEBAC5


 * 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. (WP:NPASR). North America1000 11:41, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

ETEBAC5

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

User:Kephir prodded it a while back with the following rationale: "No references at all, no evidence of notability." It was deprodded by User:James500 with the following rationale "GBooks: 5 pages for this, 25 for ETEBAC. Suggest this page be moved to ETEBAC and broadened to include all versions." I looked at the GBooks mentions, and they seem to be primarily in passing; I am not seeing enough to warrant this being a stand alone topic. I am not seeing much more on ETEBAC in general, through some sources are in French, and my French is too rudimentary to judge them (I'll note that linked fr:Échange télématique banque-clients is about ETEBAC not ETEBAC5, through it offers no help as far as good refs). I looked for a possible merge target, but I don't see anything (Electronic Banking Internet Communication Standard seems related but not a parent article, just another protocol). I am not an expert in this field, so I don't know if there is such thing as security communication protocol (Communications protocol does not mention the word security), but I think we are missing a number of parent articles, to which numerous protocols that lack independent notability could be merged. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:01, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:39, 8 July 2016 (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.