Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NuWave Communications


 * 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. Girth Summit  (blether) 11:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

NuWave Communications

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not appear to have any sources that meet WP:ORGIND. Very little significant coverage to begin with. –– FormalDude  talk  03:40, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. –– FormalDude   talk  03:40, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. –– FormalDude   talk  03:40, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep With all due respect, FormalDude, while the sources are thin, where -- other than channel magazines -- would one find news for SIP-trunking and telephony providers? I presume your main issue with this entry would be that one of the company execs logged in and significantly edited an existing article; however, there have been other contributors, and NuWave is known within the telecom industry (see this article about a large Australian telco rolling out a service, where NuWave Communications is named as an example of an established player and first-wave partner in said service, sixth paragraph). I get it. Telephony/UC is really unsexy, but that doesn't mean telco trades aren't a legitimate source. Will we also be turfing Verizon? Deutsche Telekom? RingCentral? Obviously the exec who edited his own company's Wikipedia entry should have followed protocol and noted his COI, so I propose that he be contacted and asked to note his connection to the company. But let's not pretend legitimate telecom trade rags aren't real sources (again, no normal news outlet cares about SIP-trunking; that's too boring even for regular tech rags!). Mamakaze1 (talk) 05:47, 6 October 2021 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Mamakaze1 (talk • contribs)  is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  06:41, 13 October 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  07:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * DELETE: I concur with FormalDude. This doesn't meet WP:ORGIND. Also web search only return PR articles, this article doesn't meets notability criteria.Advait (talk) 07:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete gnews reveals mainly PR articles or one line mentions. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 00:41, 21 October 2021 (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.