Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egov.Press


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. I just wanted to mention that there might be an article on this subject in the future if better sourcing was found and an editor went about creating it in Draft space and getting some AFC feedback on a draft article. But right now, the consensus here is to delete this particular article. Liz Read! Talk! 22:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Egov.Press

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Created as part of a cross-wiki spam campaign for which the creator and his socks have been blocked. The campaigns for which the site garnered attention were notable, but no case has been made that these happened because of Egov/Alash's petitions. Nor is there any other claim to notability. Sourcing is generally unreliable and not independent of the site. Accepted in good faith through AfC by an established editor who is on board with this AfD and therefore this could not be draftified but if folks think this can be improved by someone without a COI, I have no objection to draftification.

NB: Appears headed for deletion in de wiki de:Wikipedia:Löschkandidaten/16._Februar_2024 whose notability standards are less strict, was  speedied on IT Wiki  Star   Mississippi  23:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Websites, Kazakhstan,  and Russia.  Star   Mississippi  23:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Without independent sources, there's no claim for NCORP or GNG.  Chris Troutman  ( talk )  01:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and this. ‍ Relativity  01:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, and the canvassing of users (that I personally experienced) both on- and off-wiki, even after being chastised about it, gives the impression that this is being done for publicity's sake rather than out of any encyclopedic virtue. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Star Mississippi If the author of the article is directly to blame for disseminating the message and other illegal actions, then what does the article with sources have to do with it? Having studied the whole situation, it seems to me that you have a personal dislike for the author. 2A0D:B201:10E0:BD44:CCBC:9A01:BC92:77A9 (talk) 07:12, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note:This user has made no other edits on Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 08:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the following facts need to be taken into account when making a decision. These Kazakh news portals completely or partially devoted an article to the petition site as a separate topic.
 * https://spik.kz/1775-peticii-na-sajte-alash-online-prakticheski-ni-na-chto-ne-vlijajut-tak-li-jeto.html
 * https://liter.kz/petitsii-v-kazakhstane-rabotaiut-no-ne-tak-kak-my-schitaem-1643696504/
 * https://aikyn.kz/181297/petitsiya-aytar-datym-bar
 * https://zhanaqorgan-tynysy.kz/pdf/19612-14-8518-19-apan-2022-zhyl.html
 * https://informburo.kz/kaz/elaynasy/qazaqstanda-onlain-peticiya-nege-natize-bermeidi
 * http://rmebrk.kz/assets/pdfjs2/web/viewer.html?file=/journals/7972/2619.pdf
 * https://massaget.kz/basty-zhaalytar-438/87994/
 * These resources criticized the petition site.
 * https://astanatv.kz/ru/news/66308/
 * https://www.inform.kz/ru/pora-sdelat-oficial-nuyu-ploschadku-dlya-peticiy-grazhdan-zhurnalist-yuriy-masanov_a3893841
 * https://baigenews.kz/kazakhstanskiy_zhurnalist_obvinil_sayt_petitsiy_v_nakrutke_126317/
 * https://adilsoz.kz/monthly-monitoring/narusheniya-svobody-slova-v-kazahstane-iyun-2023-goda.html
 * In addition, the site’s petitions are mentioned many times in various foreign news reports. Wikipedia's rules state, When assessing the significance of web content, consider whether it has had any significant or demonstrable impact on culture, society, entertainment, sports, economics, history, literature, science, or education. I don’t care about the article, but having studied the situation, I think that the article should be revised and left. This is up to the administration. 2A0D:B201:10E0:BD44:F1B5:49DF:C11B:D812 (talk) 08:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note:This user has made no other edits on Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 08:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * As it turned out, articles in Spanish, Kazakh, Uzbek and Kyrgyz Wikipedia. Removed from Russian, Italian and French Wikipedia. 217.76.76.165 (talk) 08:19, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You have forgotten about an entry in German. Toadette  ( Let's discuss together! ) 18:31, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, cross wiki spam, blatant promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 08:27, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but the anonymous person’s arguments need to be fully verified, even if he didn’t make any edits. 217.76.76.165 (talk) 09:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * — 217.76.76.165 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Star   Mississippi  12:06, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello, still need to check all the arguments. They seem to be justified. 85.117.101.20 (talk) 15:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete and also piped the link to dewiki deletion discussion. No sources found in English, if at least, and so fails notability guidelines. Toadette  ( Let's discuss together! ) 18:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Adding additional statements, the article in all other languages are exactly identical, using the same set of pictures and sources. The eswiki article has a maintenance tag that is the same as our COI tag. Otherwise it is apparent that this article should be deleted in the other 5 languages, but this is not possibles because wikis have different policies, especially on notability. Toadette  ( Let's discuss together! ) 18:56, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also adding that the article was deleted in an additional 5 wikis according to the history of the Wikidata item associated with the topic, (The wikis are frwiki, itwiki, ruwiki, simplewiki, and ukwiki.) in addition to that the page was deleted once here on enwiki according to there. I am sure that this article should be deleted as a clear example of "cross wiki spam" which was the reason behind the locking of all involved accounts. Toadette  ( Let's discuss together! ) 19:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment, also maybe worth noting that dewiki is also having a deletion discussion. Shaws username  .  talk  . 19:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that insight (and for linking de wiki). I knew they disappeared from the sidebar but wasn't sure how to track that. I'm not certain it has previously been deleted here, just moved all over the map for capitalization/transliteration reasons. Star   Mississippi  20:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak keep delete. I don't see any cross-wiki spam. Many translations of the wiki article is not spam. The author wishes to translate his article into different languages to talk about the online petitions in Kazakhstan. The article has enough sources. The article is of low quality, that's right. I recently corrected one author's error, replaced a false nonsensical source with a relevant one, see and Talk:Egov.Press. But low quality and errors are a reason for improvement, not for removal. Its sources IMHO prove that this article has sufficient WP:N. A source from my  (in translation).  It seems,Dana Burkhanova and Asylkhan Kushkimbayev are serious authors. In this article Egov.Press is mentioned twice. À propos. It has been explained in Commons that there is no reason to quickly remove the files tagged by Star Mississippi as Speedy, see Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Astana 202302.jpg etc. This is similar to unjustified cross-wiki harassment of the author. —  Yuri V.  (t•c) 23:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC).
 * I had missed the move to a deletion discussion so thanks for flagging @Yuri V.. I do object to your characterization of it as cross wiki harassment. They are locked for spam and socking, the latter of which they have continued and the former you seem to acknowledge: The author wishes to translate his article into different languages to talk about the online petitions in Kazakhstan. is promotion. I filed the SPI, but being caught promoting a site doesn't mean they're being harassed. Star   Mississippi  00:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi all. I completely agree with @Yuri V.. I studied the problem in detail and came to the conclusion that the @Star Mississippi user is persecuting the author and trying to erase the article from all resources. Perhaps @Star Mississippi has a personal grudge, which is why the author of the article was completely blocked so that he could not make arguments to defend the article. In this case, delete Joe Biden's article for cross-wiki spam, because it exists in different languages. The article should be left. Evidence of significance is available. The author Zzremin himself received his well-deserved punishment for the newsletter. What does this article have to do with it? 85.117.104.10 (talk) 09:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Making translations of spam is absolutely spam. 331dot (talk) 11:42, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I would like to draw your attention to these facts. This can be considered proof of harassment by @Star Mississippi
 * https://w.wiki/9K9b
 * https://w.wiki/9K9d
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=1210803165
 * 176.64.30.206 (talk) 12:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: apart from the spam, the sources mostly just mention Egov.press and doesn't go WP:INDEPTH She was  a fairy 09:44, 2 March 2024 (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.