Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fido.net
my recent tagging "notability" is to encourage sources to pass notability, not trigger deletion... the assertion of notability would come from being an early (rather than popular) ISP, and also the reason why there's likely few online articles about them. Additionally, according to their twitter, Awarded Best Large Business Provider 2012 @ the ISPAs, so presumably good references for those would pass notability. OTOH, I'm not in favour of redirecting to FidoNet as separate articles aids disambiguation (I came here from the DAB), but I may be persuaded otherwise. To add to the one ref already there, this promo but useful  (non- )" is one of the longest established UK internet businesses, " http://www.managedserviceexpert.com/hosting-a-web/fido-net and incidental mention http://books.google.com/books?id=zGu3jAHbAZIC&pg=PA82&lpg=PA82&dq=%22Fido.net%22&source=bl&ots=UJdfQLlth3&sig=U2pflte7YEN6ASjbXQ2_RlImPa4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wd1iULL1Ca_Z0QWc2YDgCA&ved=0CFwQ6AEwCA, these should be good enough http://books.google.com/books?id=CuaZ_UrLJHEC&pg=PA291&lpg=PA291&dq=%22Fido.net%22&source=bl&ots=08t-rwM2kL&sig=lyp2zhUZ6aCVrU4rMe5u__X39e0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Ud5iUMOcH-Oe0QX63oCYBA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwADgK, http://books.google.com/books?id=afkgG0B5DzsC&pg=PA238&lpg=PA238&dq=%22Fido.net%22&source=bl&ots=w41x5qOp9S&sig=Qk69VFFJ5cwullI7EQ6sFW5WRIQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iN5iUILeNoyo0AWIiYCADg&ved=0CF4Q6AEwCTgU   to pass 
— User:Widefox, 10:55, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:CORPDEPTH (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)