Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GoHealth

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. Nomination withdrawn. Nature of references support keep. (non-admin closure) scope_creep^Talk 13:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GoHealth

[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)

Fails WP:ORGIND and WP:CORPDEPTH. Native advertising. scope_creep^Talk 17:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It is WP:LISTED on the Nasdaq as Nasdaq: GOCO. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 20:57, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There is sufficient secondary analysis and commentary on the company within the coverage to meet WP:NCORP. As an aside, the author has been refreshingly up front about who they are and their role in the company, and she grasped the difference between a corporate listing and an encyclopedic article. See this discussion. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:53, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per AfC discussion indicated above. Article is good enough to pass WP:NCORP. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 07:51, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can you please point to the three references that provide in-depth analysis. scope_creep^Talk 08:07, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As per Curb Safe Charmer, there are enough coverage from reliable and independent sources. Passes WP:NCORP. DMySon 14:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are 8 analyst firms (at least) covering this firm. I've tried to access some analyst reports on the company but any I've tried appears to be behind a firewall but I can see enough to know that they have provided coverage beyond simple recommendations for buy and sell. Analyst reports meet the criteria for establishing notability. Topic therefore meets NCORP/GNG. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:04, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think it was a solid keep after User:Curb Safe Charmer voted. Nomination withdrawn scope_creep^Talk 13:08, 24 September 2020 (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.