Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NCIX (2nd nomination)

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 and retitle. czar 03:43, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NCIX

NCIX (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)

As written, fails

WP:SIGCOV. Doug Mehus (talk) 23:34, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep NCIX was a highly notable organization, and as such had a significant degree of coverage given to it. Deleting it simply because a google search didn't find it doesn't count as a valid action. There's much more available if further examination is done. SuperChris (talk) 17:12, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Doug Mehus (talk) 23:34, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the
list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:56, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:56, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:56, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the
list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:56, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:35, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 17:03, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • NCIX has received substantial analysis from many analysts and publications about its bankruptcy and its data breach. This detailed analysis about both events is sufficient to allow the company to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. An option is to rename the article to be "Bankruptcy and data breach of NCIX" but I think it's fine to leave the article as titled "NCIX".

      Here is some sample analysis about the bankruptcy:

      1. TechSpot notes: "Where exactly NCIX went wrong is still open to debate. Competition from Amazon, Newegg, and other online sites may have been too much. Regardless of the reasoning, costs clearly have outweighed revenue for some time now."
      2. AnandTech notes, "The exact reasons why the company had run out of money are not disclosed officially, but chatter indicates that NCIX spent too much on retail stores and too little on improving the efficiency of its online business. ... For years, the company has competed both against traditional retailers as well as against online rivals like Amazon and Newegg. NCIX survived multiple PC retailers in Canada, which encouraged it to focus on “real” stores. So instead of investing in online sales assets (such as warehouses, distribution centers, and delivery methods), the company invested heavily in large walk-in retail outlets in the recent years, its former employees say. In total, the company used to have about a dozen of retail locations in Canada, all of which were expensive to run."
      3. PC Gamer notes, "It's not clear what exactly led to this point, though it's quite possible the company focused too much on its physical stores and not enough on its web business. ... That said, NCIX did set up a distribution center in the US in 2011. However, it hasn't been nearly as aggressive as Amazon or Newegg in the online space."
      Here is some sample analysis about the data breach:
      1. CBC News notes, "Technical expert Graham Williams says he was shocked at reports of the breach and worries how much information may be out there. "Looking at other breaches of Canadian retailers, we haven't seen this scope of information of user data, this amount of unencrypted data.""
      2. The Globe and Mail notes, "David Shipley, chief executive officer of cybersecurity firm Beauceron Security, said if the information in Mr. Doering’s post is correct the incident would rank “among the worst privacy breaches in the private sector that I’m aware of in Canada. “It’s almost the digital equivalent of an oil spill with a bankrupt company,” he said. “Because who then pays for the clean-up? What recourse do victims truly have when a company no longer exists?”"
      3. International Data Group's IT World Canada notes, "“It’s just appalling,” Ann Cavoukian, head of Ryerson University’s Privacy by Design Centre of Excellence, said of the NCIX data discovery. “It just goes to show how poorly companies protect data, especially when they’re getting rid of their hardware devices. Of course the data wasn’t encrypted, but they could at least take the time to destroy the data before getting rid of the equipment.”"
      4. Dennis Publishing's Cloud Pro notes, "“Both sellers and buyers of the customer records, allegedly belonging to the retailer, can face harsh legal ramifications,” High-Tech Bridge's CEO Ilia Kolochenko commented. “Under certain sets of circumstances it can be a serious criminal offense, however, it is too early to make any decisive conclusions prior to thorough investigation of the incident.” “Nowadays, such negligence is unfortunately not all that uncommon, even amid operating and profitable companies, let alone bankrupt ones, Kolochenko added. “Many large organisations have been exposed for throwing away plaintext PII and other sensitive data of their customers on paper, hard drives or mobile devices."
      Cunard (talk) 01:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • significant coverage). Thus, it does make sense, if keep is the result, to rename this article and refactor it around the company's data breach and, optionally, about its bankruptcy, eh? Doug Mehus T·C 01:42, 11 November 2019 (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.