Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NERO International

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. Deliberately putting aside the nominator's motives (per WP:AGF), there doesn't seem to be agreement on whether the sources provided show notability. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:19, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NERO International

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:GPG - NERO International is not a notable organization, therefore does not deserve an entry. Only three references are provided, one of which is the organization's own publication, and a second is an interview with another organization's leader (Mike Ventrella), previously deemed "not notable enough for Wikipedia per the guidelines. Notability issues were noted Jan 2012, and page was not edited to reflect concerns. Brujah7783 (talk) 13:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete no third party coverage provided or found. Ventrilla's association with the group makes the Dragon article non independent. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The nominator may well be right here, but the nominators motives are dubious, as shown in this post. This nom seems to be in pursuit of an off-wiki dispute. I therefore suggest that the closer disregard or low-weight the nominator's views, and rely on the consensus of other editors here. DES ^(talk) 14:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

while the motives are clearly revenge, the rationale is solid and I was on my way to post the AfD after finding no sources, but was beaten to the punch. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - There is one article on HighBeam in The Boston Globe from 1991. Not sure what content is there, but it does appear to be non-trivial. BOZ (talk) 16:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Here is an abstract of the same article: [1]. BOZ (talk) 16:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Primarily per the additional source showing notability that BOZ discovered (thank you), and additionally, a viscerally negative reaction to any kind of revenge AfD nomination. "You supported deleting my pet article, so I am going to nominate your favored article for deletion" is reasoning and motivation so deeply flawed that I will give any such nomination extra scrutiny. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:20, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.