Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fido.net (2nd nomination)

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. JohnCD (talk) 14:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fido.net

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

Not notable. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak ~~keep~~ delete - though I don't think the sources are very strong, FidoNet was clearly a very early (therefore probably pioneering) internet service provider dating back to the 1980s. It clearly existed and was valued at the time. The previous AfD produced a "Keep" decision. Sionk (talk) 22:06, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed my !vote, considering there is a New York provider with the same name that is the likely subject of the book source. The book source seems to be the primary reason for the previous 'Keep' decision. I'm not enough of an expert of early ISP's to challenge this confusion. Failing some sort of reliable proof of the sequence of events I think it would be misleading to keep the article. Sionk (talk) 02:16, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Certainly a good deal of coverage in secondary sources. — Cirt (talk) 04:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Really? Where? Or is that for FidoNet? Someone not using his real name (talk) 01:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. The only independent source that is cited is clearly not talking about this UK ISP but about a FidoNet node in New York. "Fido.Net" is clearly a typo there (or alternative spelling if you like) and only occurs once in the text as "Fido.Net, a networking system that linked bulletin boards around the world" (and once more in the book's index). [1] The only real source about this UK ISP is a press release. (By the way, they actually spell their name exactly as "FidoNet" so even the article's title isn't correct--it would need to be FidoNet (UK ISP); we don't normally name companies by their domain names). This charade has lasted long enough. Someone not using his real name (talk) 01:41, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The other "source found" in the previous AfD [2] is talking about the German Usenet newsgroup fido.ger.kochen [3] which is about cooking and doesn't have an immediate connection with either FidoNet or the UK ISP, although I'm inclined to think it originated on the former (i.e. on the BBS network) or at least it was named in connection to that. The source only uses fido.ger.kochen to illustrate what a google search through newsgroups looks like, so no other info is provided: "Es wurden die interessanten Gruppen fido.ger.kochen und de.rec.mampf gefunden. Die erste stammt aus dem deutschen Teil des englischen fido.net." Even if this is somehow about the UK ISP (very unlikely) it's miles and miles from providing WP:GNG-level info. Someone not using his real name (talk) 02:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- A bit more googling finds for example [4] which is a recipe originally posted to fido.ger.kochen by someone with a fidonet.org (i.e. FidoNet) email address. Someone not using his real name (talk) 02:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Someone not using his real name (talk) 02:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No sources providing in-depth coverage of this company. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Their own press release fails to mention any relation with FidoNet, which I'm sure they would have mentioned if it existed because they seem to mention every connection with other ventures otherwise. Here's what they provide as background:

“

FidoNet Registration Services Ltd (FidoNet) is an Internet Service Provider based in the UK which was formed in 2001 by the minds and technical expertise behind Demon Internet, Redbus Interhouse PLC, and the Interactive Investor International PLC (iii). FidoNet’s key goals are to provide quality service and support at sensible prices.

FidoNet’s founder Jon Morby has been involved in the fast-moving world of Internet technology since 1992 when he was recruited by Demon Internet, before which he worked as a “Registered Representative and Trader” (or StockBroker) in Birmingham. Morby founded FidoNet in 2001 in order to meet the technical requirements of fast-growing UK businesses requiring flexibility alongside of innovative technology.

”

So the only connection appears to be the reuse of the name (unlike what the wiki article claims.) Hope this helps. Someone not using his real name (talk) 02:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And besides that, they seem to be a small operation if the founder still needs (in 2012) to promote his company on forums [5]; in fact he himself writes "We are a small, quality focussed ISP [...]". Someone not using his real name (talk) 03:10, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a non notable service provider.→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 16:41, 7 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.