Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naij


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 04:05, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Naij

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject of the article fails the primary inclusion criteria. No significant coverages in multiple independent reliable sources to establish its notability. The sources in the article are unreliable as they are nothing but a self-promotional website that anyone can add content to promote themselves. The only reliable sources I can't find is on ref 8 "Thisdaylive". Ref 1 is "Alexa Internet" (database for website just like Internet Movie Database, IMDB) and doesn't establish notability, ref 2 "wakapost" is a blog, ref 3 is also "Alexa Internet", ref 4 "Naijaonpoint" is a local blog, ref 5 is still "Alexa Internet", ref 6 "facebook website", ref 7 "Opera website" (self romotional: does not establish notability since is not independent of NaiJ.com) ref 9 "Wakapost" and nothing more. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 07:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep :Naij is the most popular Nigerian news website online and you can verify from the Alexa rankings. TechCabal and TechLoy are the foremost Nigerian tech news websites and the links have been added. I think you do not understand the local Nigerian context which is why you say Naijaonpoint is a local website. However, I will find other reliable sources too. Thanks. Wikimayor (talk)
 * is high time you familiarize with WP:Indentation and learn to sign your comment. That aside, the sources you provided lack editorial control. News reporting from less-established outlets such as "Naijaonponint", is generally considered less reliable for statements of fact. Majority of the sources you provided are personal web pages, Internet forum posting and any website whose content is largely user-generated, including the Alexa Internet and Internet Movie Database are largely not acceptable. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 09:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 19:32, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 19:32, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 19:32, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Alexa.com is not a social web site like IMDB. Alexa gathers statistics from internet traffic and is considered one of the main "site analytics" engines. So Alexa ranking is to web sites what h-index is to academic papers. Although I suspect that it is more scientific than the h-index. LaMona (talk) 00:44, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, of course Alexa.com is not a social website and incomparable to IMDB but the content of both web seems to be a user-generated contents. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 01:43, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep There is a bit of reference cruft here, but the Alexa ranking (which is high, and probably quite notably high for Nigeria) and the partnership with Opera (as related in many references) convince me. LaMona (talk) 00:52, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The content of Alexa Internet seemed to be a user-generated contents and may not establish notability. Meanwhile you don't even imagine why your presumed notable "Naij.com" has not been significantly discussed in multiple independent reliable sources like The Punch, Vanguard, The Guardian, Thisday and The Nation among other reputable sources in Nigeria., if you ask me why "NaiJ.com" has not been the subject of these reputable Nigerian reliable sources, I will simply say "Naij.com is not notable" . Don't forget that webpages were only ranked amongst users who had the Alexa Toolbar installed, and could be biased if a specific audience subgroup was reluctant to take part in the rankings and this had earlier caused some controversy over how representative Alexa's user base was of typical Internet behavior, especially for less-visited sites. In 2007, it was established and reported that "Alexa rankings" contradicted data from the comScore web analytics service, including ranking YouTube ahead of Google, an obvious aberration. This aberration does not only annul the reliability of "Alexa Ranking" but give an insight to why I may reluctantly compare it with h-index (in the case of academic). We simply cannot base our primary inclusion criteria on "Alexa Ranking". Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 01:43, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Familiarizing with the WP:Indentation and should get the hang of it soon. Opera and MTN are two major players in Africa and do not partner with just anyone. That aside, giving internet connectivity to a million people is a big deal and in my opinion, notable enough. I still don't agree with your submissions about Alexa - I can't think of any other website ranking service that is as popular or reliable, but you can check any if you do and compare the results. You also keep insisting that there are no multiple independent sources but there are links to mentions of this partnership involving Naij in The Guardian and Thisday, two of the examples that you yourself mention as well as IT Web, an independent and notable South African tech website. Wikimayor (talk) 05:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * , I cancelled your second "Keep" vote as editors are disallow to vote twice. Having reminded you of that, I can't see an evidence that Naij.com has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability. No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists or it partner with notable organizations. Having partner with "MTN" and "Opera" is not an evidence of notability, its just an evidence that the website is functioning. The evidence of notability must show that Naij.com has gained significant independent coverage or recognition. Sources of evidence include recognized peer-reviewed publications, credible and authoritative books, reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally. In the case of a website such as Naij.com, an independent source would be multiple newspaper coverage of the site. "IT Web" is blog. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 10:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * , I also mentioned that the coverage in The Guardian and Thisday, but I see you have ignored that. has done that and recognised the notability, but it would be great to have another unbiased editor do so too. Wikimayor (talk) 12:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michig (talk) 07:26, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. This, this, this, this, and this point to the news forum as being important enough for other organizations to quote and use as a source.  This is a nice "substantial coverage" piece, and while negative, this also shows the forum's notability. And this was a relatively quick search. If I had highbeam, I might find more. Add Alexa and I think it clearly passes WP:GNG. I don't think Alexa by itself is a good barometer, but when put in perspective of these other items, I feel it is relevant.  Onel 5969  TT me 22:44, 7 August 2015 (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.