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. Consensus here is quite clearly keep, even when removing SPA input into the matter. (non-admin closure) -- Dane talk 08:04, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ATMIA[edit]

ATMIA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Locally-based association of which the listed sources are still only PR, announcements, listings and trivial mentions, none of them genuinely amount to substance needed by our notaiblity policies and there's concerns as it is of this only existing as a business listing of which we are not. When an article closely focuses with "ATMIa and members are", "ATMIA and members can", "ATMIA's chief aim is to provide a forum for common issues among members including technical matters such as coordinating the global adoption of operating systems", "ATMIA has advocated", etc, that's PR speak, regardless of whatever or whoever, and that's also explicitly what our policies are against. We never accept articles simply by the sheer fact they are "informative and sourced" because our policies are far important compared to that. As such, this shouldn't have been accepted at all. SwisterTwister talk 17:39, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But to make the case deletion
1) About notoriety,
An initial issue with this article was that it relied too much on ATMmarketplace, Business Wire and Finextra. Many of these were indeed PR notes, in no small measure thanks to my naivete as this is the first full article contribution. As mentioned above, thanks to the assistance of other wiki editors, these sources were diversified. These include a statement in the New York Times, on "the leading trade group" (ref 6), discussion within the future of Windows XP and 10 (ref 8), as well as evidence from parliamentary depositions by ATMIA members in the USA, Canada, Australia and Sweden (refs 21 to 26) among others.
In brief, I did took care and went at lengths to show independent notoriety while avoiding PR notes. So I do believe TwistedSister's view is based on an old version of the article rather than on the current and approved version.
2) ATM Industry Association has been referenced in the following wiki articles
cash machine / Automated Teller Machine (twice)
Windows XP (which corroborates footnote 8 in the current ATMIA article page)
KAL Software
MegaLink
Oberthur Cash Protection
So it is not orphan but, in my view, validated by other wiki articles.
CIM2014 (talk) 19:33, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
IP aside, please state if you have COI and how this is a specific policy-based comment. SwisterTwister talk 15:46, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
IP aside, please state if you have COI and how this is a specific policy-based comment. SwisterTwister talk 15:46, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There may appear to be consensus, but nearly half of the keep !votes come from singe-purpose IPs/accounts. This seems fishy and we need more eyes on this. Lepricavark (talk) 00:16, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lepricavark (talk) 00:16, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think that an association with several thousand members (indvidual and corporate) across 66 countries could be considered as 'Locally-based".Moreover, during edits one of the things removed was its corporate governance, where it was noted that staff is distributed throughout the world (just a handful are actually based in the USA - let alone South Dakota). Thanks, Bernardo
CIM2014 (talk) 15:12, 1 January 2017 (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.
More