Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RxAll Inc.

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. (non-admin closure) b uidhe 00:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RxAll Inc.

[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)

Organization does not satisfy WP:NCORP & invariably has no WP:CORPDEPTH. Celestina007 (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep there is plenty of coverage in reputable publications, and in considerable depth. The article needs a lot of attention but the company is clearly notable. Rathfelder (talk) 15:10, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rathfelder: where did you find depth of coverage? These look like routine funding announcements by the titles. - Bri.public (talk) 22:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think Chemistry World is a respectable source. I've never heard of Sahara Reporters before, but it seems independent and the article is in considerable depth. It's made the Guardian, though not in much depth. Rathfelder (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:52, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there is sufficient coverage to establish notability as provided in some of the sources including one mentioned above and this and this. Besides, this is one of those subjects in my opinion that do great work and deserves a stand-alone especially in view of the fact that many greedy western companies and others are using Africa as a dumping ground or guinea pigs to send their dangerous drugs to, which they would not dare sell in the west—in fear of being find or jailed. It would help many of our readers who do not have the luxury. I would rather read an article about this organization than a pretty western bimbo famous for only showing their boops. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 23:55, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Important US-Africa medical company. Some coverage from around the globe: [1][2][3][4].--Chuka Chief (talk) 18:50, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Regarding to what Senegambianamestudy and Chuka Chief has given, stated and cited, It stand a chance to stay in Wikipedia, the article has a story to tell. An@ss_koko^(speak)^(war) 20:00, 22 February 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.