- 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. Black Kite (talk) 22:48, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Irish Payment Services Organisation
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Irish Payment Services Organisation ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No evidence of notability, most sources I found were trivial and did not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Article seems promotional overall. Jay Jay What did I do? 05:15, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Jay Jay What did I do? 05:15, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Jay Jay What did I do? 05:15, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:GNG. Megtetg34 ( talk) 00:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. In terms of the applicable criteria ( WP:GNG and WP:NORG), while there is some news and industry coverage of the subject (for example this tag-based topic in one of the main newspapers of record in Ireland, the Irish Times), the subject is not the primary topic of the majority of coverage. For example, when sorting by relevance, the top news hits include articles like this. Where the subject is mentioned, but the primary topic is something else. Created by apparent COI profile, and so WP:NOTHERE and WP:PROMO concerns are raised. Guliolopez ( talk) 12:40, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. "Promotional," per the nomination? Quite the reverse. The IPSO was an obscure part of the plumbing of the Irish banking system before post-Euro integration of Irish payments made it less necessary. The four big banks that controlled it preferred to keep the IPSO invisible to ordinary users. Most of us prefer not to think about how payments and cash withdrawals make their way from the point of transaction back to our bank accounts, but this plumbing is still vital. The article needs proper sourcing, which I will now try to do. Fiachra10003 ( talk) 02:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - I've now rewritten the article almost in full. Fiachra10003 ( talk) 14:31, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Of note is the article was significantly rewritten and reworked after the nomination for deletion, which also included the addition of seven new sources. An analysis from other users regarding those sources would benefit this discussion at this time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 15:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Relisting comment: Of note is the article was significantly rewritten and reworked after the nomination for deletion, which also included the addition of seven new sources. An analysis from other users regarding those sources would benefit this discussion at this time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 15:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. Plenty of valid sources. Could also rename/create new/then merge into/link to a "Banking in Ireland" article, but I think there's enough to justify its own article, maybe expand it a bit more.-- HistoricalAccountings ( talk) 12:35, 3 February 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.