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.
ansh666 02:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Mege -- Almost all listed companies in the website listing
Bravo Telecom (#4) among others have a Wikipedia Page : see reference page
Plans by carrier, I could find at least the four preceding
Bravo Telecom such as
BellCogecoDistributel and
EBOX. Because I leave in Canada, I know that both latest ones are adopting same business model than BT and are comparable in terms of employees and turn over. Additionally, when Canadian users search for
Bravo Telecom they are faced to the page about
Bravo (Saudi Arabia) which does no more exist and it doesn't make sense to keep them in the index. I would recommend merging both pages
Bravo Telecom and
Bravo (Saudi Arabia) into the same page about the Canadian internet provider which is more useful for users in Canada and in the world.
Meding46 (
talk) 16:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Or more useful to your pocket.Anyways,
WP:OSE and
WP:USEFUL aren't valid arguments.And, I live far away from Canada, so why do I choose to believe you or any other non-reliable source?If, you believe that Bravo (Saudi Arabia) which does no more exist and it doesn't make sense to keep them in the index, feel free to seek an AFD.
Winged BladesGodric 16:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep From what I understand there are people specialized in deletion and this may be a new business. I live in CANADA (see my IP) and I believe the brand
Bravo Telecom deserves its own Wikipedia page, I do not understand why is there a debate about this !
74.58.71.52 (
talk) 00:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
(
edit conflict) "I think it deserves a page" unfortunately is totally meaningless. The point of this discussion is not to evaluate what you think, but evaluate whether this article subject meets English Wikipedia's inclusion policy. Can you explain how the article subject meets English Wikipedia inclusion policies (
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH)? Thanks! Ben · Salvidrim!✉ 00:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete No indications of notability, references fail the criteria for establishing notability, fails
WP:NCORP. Topic fails GNG.
HighKing++ 00:43, 18 January 2018 (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.
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.
ansh666 02:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Mege -- Almost all listed companies in the website listing
Bravo Telecom (#4) among others have a Wikipedia Page : see reference page
Plans by carrier, I could find at least the four preceding
Bravo Telecom such as
BellCogecoDistributel and
EBOX. Because I leave in Canada, I know that both latest ones are adopting same business model than BT and are comparable in terms of employees and turn over. Additionally, when Canadian users search for
Bravo Telecom they are faced to the page about
Bravo (Saudi Arabia) which does no more exist and it doesn't make sense to keep them in the index. I would recommend merging both pages
Bravo Telecom and
Bravo (Saudi Arabia) into the same page about the Canadian internet provider which is more useful for users in Canada and in the world.
Meding46 (
talk) 16:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Or more useful to your pocket.Anyways,
WP:OSE and
WP:USEFUL aren't valid arguments.And, I live far away from Canada, so why do I choose to believe you or any other non-reliable source?If, you believe that Bravo (Saudi Arabia) which does no more exist and it doesn't make sense to keep them in the index, feel free to seek an AFD.
Winged BladesGodric 16:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep From what I understand there are people specialized in deletion and this may be a new business. I live in CANADA (see my IP) and I believe the brand
Bravo Telecom deserves its own Wikipedia page, I do not understand why is there a debate about this !
74.58.71.52 (
talk) 00:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
(
edit conflict) "I think it deserves a page" unfortunately is totally meaningless. The point of this discussion is not to evaluate what you think, but evaluate whether this article subject meets English Wikipedia's inclusion policy. Can you explain how the article subject meets English Wikipedia inclusion policies (
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH)? Thanks! Ben · Salvidrim!✉ 00:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete No indications of notability, references fail the criteria for establishing notability, fails
WP:NCORP. Topic fails GNG.
HighKing++ 00:43, 18 January 2018 (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.