Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Universal Powerline Association


 * 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. Please defer merge related discussion to article talk. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 01:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Universal Powerline Association


Article about a trade association almost certainly written by one of its members - user:Upaplc. Clear case of conflict of interest if not spam. (As an aside, I would like to know why there is a need for two organisations in this particular field - the UPA and the HomePlug Powerline Alliance.) -- RHaworth 07:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete per nom. So tagged. MER-C 10:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - This page has been edited to eliminate advertising like content making it similar to MoCA, HomePlug, DSL Forum etc. This is a trade organisation with relevance to the telecommuncations industry, with members from at least 13 multinational enterprises. Google gives  27,900 hits. (There are two organisations which back two different technologies, like Blu-ray Disc and HD-DVD - to remove one and leave the other would infringe NPOV. --Upaplc 10:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep for now, seems clean. Mango juice talk 10:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 *  Neutral or merge with another powerline broadband article. Brief return from Wikbreak for this one -- see longer comments on AfD talk page. It all hinges on notability -- is this org. notable? Also, Upaplc has clear conflicts of interest and should not be editing this article or adding UPA links elsewhere per WP:COI (he/she's new and may not have known this).--A. B. 12:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I must say that I find this edit to be disappointing to say the least. --A. B. 14:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge into relevant article per above. --Howrealisreal 15:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, verifiable organisation. The fact that the article started its life with a COI isn't sufficient reason to nuke it, in my opinion.  Lankiveil 01:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC).
 * Strong Keep - these guys exist, are notable enough and the article is NPOV. Probably needs recategorising and linking to other articles on powerline networking. Pete Fenelon 01:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per the above commenters. Yamaguchi先生 23:07, 14 November 2006


 * 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.