Deletion of Alt.sysadmin.recovery

Comment: this is a particularly well-known newsgroup, but I still see no evidence of  per Wikipedia's standards. Perhaps a EWSGROUP is needed
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:NEWSGROUP)

Comment: unfortunately the scary devil monastery has received only trivial coverage. (Also note that  already includes all internet-based content.  is just the most common shortcut, and there is also 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:INTERNET)

Comment: An interesting newsgroup, but I don't think it meets the  criteria for notability. Incidentally,  ought to cover newsgroups based on its provision that "Any content which is distributed solely on the Internet is considered, for the purposes of this guideline, as web content." (Technically and historically, I believe some newsgroups were distributed other than by means of the Internet, but I don't know if that is the case anymore, and at any rate the non-Internet distribution of newsgroups is unlikely to be significant in contemporary times.) The most likely method by which a newsgroup could satisfy  would be to meet criterion 1, "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." I will discuss this issue at Wikipedia talk:Notability (web
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:WEB||WP:WEB)

Comment: doesn't seem to have any chance of meeting 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Not just another news group.  It meets #Criteria requirement 1 for notability, even though that isn't completely clear from the article.  A google search shows how much influence the newsgroup has had.  Most of the hits are talking about material covered in the newsgroup, not about the newsgroup itself, but that still counts under WEB (The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.)  For a few examples that are perhaps amongst the more serious publications, see for eg http://fishbowl.pastiche.org/2003/07/29/the_devolution_of_online_communities_a_case_study and some of http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=%22Alt.sysadmin.recovery&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws .  That said, WEB also says: "Wikipedia articles should not exist only to describe the nature, appearance or services a website offers, but should describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering detail on a website's achievements, impact or historical significance."  This needs to be done before the article can be described as good.  But the newsgroup is notable.  Regards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)