- 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 procedural close. Given the SPI investigation outcome, it is clear that the nomination was made in bad faith by User:DJRSD.
If a rough consensus holds that the nomination was made in bad faith, the page may be speedily kept.
To maintain integrity of the AfD, I am closing this discussion without comment on the discussion and users may renominate without prejudice. Seddon talk 23:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oneindia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable news portal only to create for earning money from Advertisement. Lacks significant coverage with in-depth information and also fails WP:GNG. DJRSD (talk) 07:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC) Blocked sock, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JeepersClub. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. DJRSD (talk) 07:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. DJRSD (talk) 07:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. DJRSD (talk) 07:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Does not meet NCORP based on what I can see in my search. JavaHurricane 09:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Waddles 🗩 🖉 16:26, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: in agreement with the nominator. No indication of ncorpFaizal batliwala (talk) 09:11, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per above. JeepersClub (talk) 07:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)Blocked sock. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 15:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]- Weak keep, websites don't need in-depth coverage (WP:NCORP is not applicable to them), they only need non-trivial coverage in multiple independent sources which it does have although a bit borderline, see WP:WEBCRIT. Alternatively, it's founder is clearly notable with in-depth coverage so it could have been redirected there but can't really suggest that since that article doesn't exist yet. Tayi Arajakate Talk 04:39, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Greetings, Tayi Arajakate. Its founder may be notable but that does not mean at all that everything the founder did or does create is notable as well. We have the explicit WP:NOTINHERITED. -The Gnome (talk) 08:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep: Oneindia is one of the leading national and regional news portal in India. And looking to the contribution history [1], most probably the person who listed it for an AfD is nothing but a joke. - Iamrajdeepdas (talk) 06:43, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Iamrajdeepdas, What is a joke in my contribution history? And on what ground you put 'strong keep'? Please clarify. DJRSD (talk) 16:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- As a sockpuppet, DJRSD, you are worse than a joke. MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:23, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: @DJRSD: Your contribution is showing that you're tagging useful pages for an AfD . In this case, the ref list for the OneIndia article is less but this donesn't mean that this subject is meaningless. OneIndia is one of the largest news portals following by the Times of India, Indian Express, News18 and similar big news organizations. Sometimes the subject is strong enough to demonstrate its notability. And you have already received notice for this kind of contribution history [2]- Iamrajdeepdas (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Tayi and Iamrajdeepdas. Borderline, but there appears to be enough coverage. — Amakuru (talk) 12:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The sourcing by Tayi Arajakate is pretty thin (as in short and not very detailed). It's not in depth enough to count as significant coverage in my opinion. Further, some of the sources are not even about the portal itself but about mergers and acquisitions of the business arm of the company. As such, WP:NCORP does apply. The portal is a product of the company which operates it, so we have to weigh sources accordingly. There's really not enough content about the portal itself to pass SIGCOV, as we are blending two essentially different topics. You can't use articles essentially about the finances of the business/corporation side of the organization operating the portal without looking at NCORP as a guide.4meter4 (talk) 20:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, lacks in-depth coverage to meet WP:NCORP. MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete since there are simply not enough sources out there with anything substantial or specific abt this web corporation. Claiming simply that "there are many sources" simply won't do: The proof of burden is on those who claim enough notability is out there. -The Gnome (talk) 08:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep; I don't know what WP:BEFORE search yielded or if people know these sources already but I found the following sources. Another possibility is to redirect these to a non existing Greynium Information Technology and include the various portals/brands it owns. See the following sources:
-
- (Unclear how reliable/independent Exchange4Media is) ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:03, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The links proffered above by Shushugah are extremely weak: Two are about another corporation interested in OneIndia or buying shares of it (here and here), while this link (to a publication assessed by Shushugaha as of doubtful reliability & dependence) is about the corporation's managing director and not our subject. We still have nothing - and not for lack of trying to find something. -The Gnome (talk) 16:11, 12 September 2021 (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.