Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KlickEx

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 keep. postdlf (talk) 21:15, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

KlickEx

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

Non-notable. Previously deleted by PROD by JamesBWatson for being non-notable/promo. Recreated by user request. CSD for it being promo declined, but then the admin removed most the article that was purely PR and left note company doesn't appear notable. Admin then stated found 1 reference, but upon reading it looks like it's a PR about a deal involving the company. *See the history of the article for those comments. Caffeyw (talk) 03:25, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably keep: The article now contains two newspaper articles that talk about it, one in quite a bit of detail (it's the subject of the article). The newspaper is the largest circulating newspaper in New Zealand, meaning (to me) that coverage there suggests that the corporation is important by New Zealand standards. I don't see any indication that that article is a press release (any more than any other newspaper article). I think that's enough to pass WP:CORP, but I can understand why someone would lean towards delete. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:00, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NRVE and meeting WP:CORP, and expand over time and through regular editing. Multiple independent sources are available which speak toward this topic and its works,National Business Review (1) Stuff (1) New Zealand Herald (1) New Zealand Herald (2) New Zealand Herald (3) Scoop (1) Scoop (2) National Business Review (2) Fiji Times and more... even dry media articles describing the workings and plans of a newer company can have it meet WP:GNG.... and notable to New Zealand is notable enough for en.Wikipedia. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 10:40, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- The awards imply that it is likely to become notable, even if it is not yet. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info -- Please excuse the newbie; but here are some 'more' references....

Swift names KlickEx/Passport at top innovator of 2013 Idealog page24 - top ranked in Asia one of the founders has twice been recognised for KlickEx, as the winner of the New Zealand Hi-Tech Young Achiever of the Year (2012 High Tech 2012, High Tech 2013) - and the company won the Financial World Innovatoin awards in London [1] for building the 'world's "best payments initiative"' so the Royal Chartered Institute of Bankers says. KlickEx put PassportFX (a product) into the US in 2013, and US Bank Innovation Magazine imediately and named the US managing director one of the top executive innovators in banking #42, Bank Innovation Magazine 2013 - "executives shaping the future of banking"] - the company is also a presenter at SIBOS 2013 in Dubai and Finnovate Asia in Singapore in November.

Keep -- My two cents is that these kinds of organisations/people are hard to impress - so something noteworthy WP:NRVE is likely. 77.49.222.50 (talk) 15:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Original Author (from 2010): Team - thanks for the clean up. The article well referenced and structured before the 2012 deletion spree - Can this be recovered? There was also KlickEx_Software which was more technical. The company is a utility function (neither NGO nor Industry Body); it's a clearing system that works to eliminate unregulated alternative payment systems - pre-dating bitcoin (and designed to replace other Hawala systems in the region for safety reasons, as AML regulations entered force).

2013 update - (KlickEx) was also listed as one of the Top 6 "Community Banking Initiatives" of 2013; and again as "the Best Payments Initiative of 2013" by the Royal Chartered Institute of Bankers, London for it's synthetic liquidity engine for lowering costs in low-volume currency pairs. This is the second time in 3 years it's been recognised. The wiki entry in 2012 got abusive - so the article lapsed until re-appearing as it is today. Thanks again Admins. Keep Belro629 (talk) 12:11, 4 September 2013 (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.