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.
Unremarkable internet service provider. The article is written in a very promotional tone as well, with 4 sources listed.
CatcherStormtalk 07:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep. I think you're right about the promotional tone but this company would seem to be notable.
Cnet article
[1], The Straits Times article
[2],
Channel NewsAsia[3], Yahoo
[4] (although this last one is borderline at best). I got all of these from a quick Google search: someone who spent real time looking these up could find a lot more. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Nomader (
talk •
contribs) 07:52, 22 December 2015
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Natg 19 (
talk) 01:41, 29 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep for now at best as this seems to satisfy at least minimally.
SwisterTwistertalk 06:19, 29 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep. Going over the hits on Google News, it's a little sparser than I'd like, but there's enough coverage there to satisfy me. A few have already been highlighted here. Plus, the
CNET article above is from the US, which demonstrates international coverage.
NinjaRobotPirate (
talk) 07:49, 31 December 2015 (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.