Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Farmmi

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. czar 04:29, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Farmmi[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This would definitely confuse the untrained eye but the organization lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources as required by WP:NCORP. A before search turns up press release such as this. Furthermore and this is where it gets interesting, the organization does indeed have a Bloomberg and Reuters entry but both entries are “Profiles” both sources do not say anything about them other than the profile of the organization thus WP:ORGDEPTH isn’t met. A before search also shows that the organization relies on pr sponsored posts, press release as well as primary sources all which do not demonstrate notability. Celestina007 (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just my two cents...I am the article creator, been here on Wikipedia long enough to know well its pro and cons...not questioning the rules but sometimes they are applied subjectively; i could name lots of other articles that barely meet the criterias mentioned, yet they are still alive; I have even pointed out flaws in Apple's entry that would make it a candidate for deletion; Farmmi is a international company from China listed on the Nasdaq. Is this less notable or important than, say, Busey Bank that's been on Wikipedia for years without citing any sources besides primary sources? Why D2h has not been tagged for speedy deletion? Sometimes it's just a tails or head situation. Long live Wikipedia Itemirus (talk) 11:35, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — Saying or implying that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS which are retained on mainspace is similar to your article is being WP:POINTy and constitutes WP:ATA. An organization needs to satisfy WP:NCORP to prove that it is truly notable. Celestina007 (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[3600] news articles about the company. I guess it complies with the notability requirements. Itemirus (talk) 12:25, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have WP:THREE or so sources that you believe best show the companies notability? Please ensure that your sources meet the guidelines at WP:ORGCRIT. For example, press releases and speculation about the stock price (which are all I could see in the link you provided) are not counted by NCORP guidelines. Jumpytoo Talk 01:40, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reply Here are four:

FAMI Stock: Why Little-Known Farmmi Is Plunging 50% Today*
Could Edible Mushrooms Be a Tasty Investment With FAMI?
Is Farmmi a Good Chinese Stock to Add to Your Portfolio?
Farmmi: A Chinese Agriculture Brand Set to Capitalize on New Wellness Trends Itemirus (talk) 07:49, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I can't see why the sources provided above - taken together - wouldn't be considered significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. St★lwart¹¹¹ 03:32, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Although it was difficult to find anything that wasn't PR or a stock price discussion, Itemirus provided enough for this to pass WP:ORGIN. The page just needs to be extended to incorporate the 4 sources. Heartmusic678 (talk) 17:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per WP:NCORP. References provided above by Itemirus appear to meet ORGIND and CORPDEPTH criteria for establishing notability, topic meets NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:05, 13 August 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.