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. KTC (talk) 20:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

eSewa[edit]

ESewa (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)

I can see no evidence of notability here. The very many refs show that it exists and this it has proper crede3ntials for handling financial transactions over the internet, but nothing to suggest notability. I appears to be yet another on-line financial portal, this time in Nepal, but that alone is not notability. It was tagged for notability in October 2012 and nothing seems to have improved since then. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:56, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there are claims and sources but still nothing fully convincing of solid independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 06:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I can't find any significant coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:22, 3 June 2016 (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.