Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies/archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

This page is an archive for closed deletion discussions relating to Companies. For open discussions, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies.


Companies

[edit]

Articles for Deletion

[edit]
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The result was Nomination withdrawn. Fenix down (talk) 16:25, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of sports kit manufacturing companies

[edit]
List of sports kit manufacturing companies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary and incomplete list, which is unsourced JMHamo (talk) 13:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 13:49, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  14:02, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  14:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  14:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  14:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
More or less. I guess it could refer to sportswear or sports equipment or both. Spiderone 15:16, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  1. The claim that it is not necessary is basically WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC.
  2. The claim that it is incomplete is basically WP:NEGLECT
  3. The claim to no sources is basically WP:MUST (whilst also being WP:BLUE in this instance as it is self-evident that the constituents of the list are sports kit manufacturers to the vast majority of people).
The claims of listcruft are also flawed:
  1. Point 1: Given the existence of this it seems perfectly reasonable to have a list of companies by this defining characteristic.
  2. Point 3: None of the four points at WP:IINFO are relevant to this list which by its title is inherently not indiscriminate.
  3. Point 5: No evidence is provided that the list cannot be expanded. In fact this is the opposite of what the initial deletion rationale claims when it says it is incomplete.
  4. Point 8 is irrelevant per WP:NOTPAPER and also because WP is not just an encyclopedia per WP:NGEO so the fact you wouldn't find the same content in the Encyclopedia Britannica is not a relevant deletion rationale.
  5. Point 12 is demonstrably false. the current constituents are all large global companies of significant importance to their sector. There are also others of similar size that could be added without coming close to making this point true.
That said though, the title is a bit poor. It should be moved to List of sporting goods manufacturers. Fenix down (talk) 15:12, 29 October 2015 (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.
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 delete.  Sandstein  13:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pardot

[edit]
Pardot (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. The prior AfD is a sad case of amateur reviewers declaring notability based on not understanding the difference between a reliable source and press releases (which is what one person cited in abundance, impressing the second, while the third deemed the company's existence in Google search sufficient). Sigh. As for me, I don't see anything but press releases, and mentions in passing, primarily in the marketing trade journals walled garden anyway. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 14:55, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 14:55, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 14:55, 23 October 2015 (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.
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 delete--Ymblanter (talk) 16:21, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Osklen

[edit]
Osklen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. I am also not seeing any RS in Google/Google News. Prior AfD had participants noting that the company is known in Brazil, but nobody provided a single reliable source... yet. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 14:53, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 14:53, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 14:53, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not trying to be WP:IDONTKNOWIT, but I'm Brazilian and I've never heard of them (maybe because I'm not rich). Jokes aside, I don't question the company's notability, but, c'mon, just look at this page. "Osklen is a Brazilian fashion brand based on harmonization of contrasts, in which urban and nature, organic and technological live together"; "Osklen makes clothes for people who identify with the lifestyle offered by the brand" - such sentences in an encyclopedic entry? Really? Can't even understand how it actually survived its first nomination. Victão Lopes Fala! 17:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now at least as I'm not seeing much convincingly better. SwisterTwister talk 07:16, 24 October 2015 (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.
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 speedy delete. A7 is just as valid now as it was before. DGG ( talk ) 00:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hybe (website)

[edit]
Hybe (website) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Was speedily deleted before as Hybe.com for A7. My concern is that the significance is still not credibly stated. Failing that, the article isn't notable either (WP:WEBCRIT); all news stories I can find are based on the press release. The article itself seems to coatrack the affiliated TV program to the website. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 22:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 22:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 22:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 22:33, 21 October 2015 (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.
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 delete.  Sandstein  20:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bloxers

[edit]
Bloxers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The title of the article is a commercial protologism; there is insufficient evidence yet of notability. (The article was prodded shortly after creation, but the prod message was removed.)  --Lambiam 21:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge to Boxers - Hmmm. I've been keeping an eye on this article out of curiosity. Not surprised it came to AFD. There was a lot of international media flurry in July 2015. At least two French articles - [1], [2]; Italian [3], Indonesian [4], and Dutch [5], alongside dozens of English language articles. So there was definitely a flurry of international interest in mid-July, but it is clearly too soon and pretty much equivalent to a single event. Enough for a mention in Boxers at this point, but let's see if they're still getting coverage a year or so later. For now, merge and if they continue the way they've started, then an article sounds like a good idea, but for now - TOO SOON. Mabalu (talk) 22:29, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The media attention echoed the info in their press kit and was clearly due to the curiosity value, but, as far as I can tell, the product is not in production. You can "preorder" one via their website for $29.99, but the Indiegogo campaign ended with 12% of its goal and only 81 backers, so there is room for doubt that this will ever enter production.  --Lambiam 10:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  04:13, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  04:14, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:31, 21 October 2015 (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.
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 delete (WP:SNOW) as per WP:NOTADVERT. North America1000 04:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Book my flight private limited

[edit]
Book my flight private limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Blatant advertisement. Oscarthecat (talk) 06:43, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  07:34, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  07:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  07:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 26 October 2015 (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.
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 delete. Spartaz Humbug! 21:31, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

T-Bull

[edit]
T-Bull (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced and comes off as promotional for the company rather than just an article. GamerPro64 00:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  01:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  01:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  01:11, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  01:11, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2015 (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.
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 delete. MBisanz talk 01:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Healthwarehouse

[edit]
Healthwarehouse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searches for '"healthwarehouse" kentucky' suggest that this company hasn't received any substantial coverage in reliable sources and therefore fails to meet WP:CORP. SmartSE (talk) 19:49, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  20:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  20:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  20:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  20:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:00, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:00, 26 October 2015 (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.
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 delete. MBisanz talk 01:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

XEAR

[edit]
XEAR (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced article about company. Googling found just YouTube, Linkedin and this Wp article. Note: The username of the SPA that created this matches name of the company founder. DexDor (talk) 06:08, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


So what exactly is the issue? I am the company founder, but there are many company pages on wikipedia - and it is also categorised as such.carsten.schipke (talk) 06:20, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To be acceptable and better composed carsten.schipke, this article needs better sources such as third-party coverage be it news and magazine for weight and depth. If willing, we can draft and userfy this to your userspace where you can maintain until it is acceptable and set for mainspace and this would also allow you to familiarize yourself with how editing works. Cheers,
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  07:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  07:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  07:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  07:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now and draft and userfy if needed as mentioned above as not only is this is a newly founded company so coverage will not be bountiful, there's nothing to suggest better improvement for a better article. SwisterTwister talk 07:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, though I still do not understand the reasoning. Its not massive marketing or anything like that - so I don't understand how the age of a company decides whether it deserves to be found in an encyclopedia that seamingly attempts to index the whole world.carsten.schipke (talk) 08:59, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:WHYN. We are not attempting to "index the whole world". For one thing, every article (and especially articles created by those unfamiliar with Wp editing and who have a COI) increases the workload on the (experienced) Wikipedians who fix and maintain things. DexDor (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The guidelines governing this, WP:CORP, ask for sources and references from some editorially independent venues -- which this lacks. News coverage, reviews, even posts in well-regarded blogs can help. @Carsten.schipke: Typically, an article must pass tests of WP:Verifiability, WP:Reliable Sources, WP:Wikipedia is not, and WP:Notability. Most articles here pass the first 3, and then we argue about notability, which is essentially what people in the discussion say it is. My recommendation here though is based primarily on the lack of sources in your article and my inability to find any. Because of the self-promotion that sometimes occurs, the policies for inclusion of companies (and people) are quite exclusive (be publicly traded). I would suggest an article for your product(s), which will could be covered in the press, academically, and on the Web in a way that may merit inclusion.--69.204.153.39 (talk) 01:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 25 October 2015 (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.
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 delete. MBisanz talk 01:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Halaqah Media

[edit]
Halaqah Media (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete for lack of substantive coverage, much less significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG and fails WP:CORP. It does not even get close to fulfillig WP:CORPDEPTH. Their main claim to fame is as the production company for 500 Years Later, a film which won awards at several minor film festivals, no major awards. Coverage of Halaqah Media includes the usual wikipedia mirros, twitter, facebook, youtube and the like, spot advertisements, their own and related websites, like the websites of the films they have produced, sales sites like this one, and directory sites like ukscreen, ovguide and discogs. There seems to be no substantive indepedent coverage in reliable secondary sources. Other coverage just mentions Halaquah Media in passing as the producer when mentioning one of their films or audio recordings. (Examples: here,here and here.) Their films have not received much coverage. None of the hits in Google books do more than mention Halaqah Media in passing when citing one of their films. Many of the Google book hits don't even contain mention of Halaqah Media, such as Perished Nations, due to Google's automatic synonym and related terms add-ins. The article cites only their own website (three times), and the related websites of two of their films. The article was created by an IP editor in November 2005‎ apparently as a promotional piece, much of the promo has been removed, their sales site is still in "External links". Halaqah Media founded the non-profit "African Holocaust Society" as their educational research wing, and afrikanholocaust.com and africanholocaust.net are related sites that promote their films and ideology. --Bejnar (talk) 16:46, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 02:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  05:26, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  05:28, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  05:28, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2015 (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.
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 Delete. Michig (talk) 10:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HLZBLZ

[edit]
HLZBLZ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Corporation doesn't show notability. The company is also in one city, not nationwide. //nepaxt 01:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  02:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  02:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  02:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as my searches simply found nothing better than using "HLZBLZ HellzBellz" for a few links at News and browser. Pinging Diannaa and C.Fred. SwisterTwister talk 05:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'm not seeing any claim to notability or any in-depth coverage in the media. I don't think the company meets our notability requirements at this time. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:05, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. While I can find the company mentioned in secondary sources, there's no depth of coverage. Further, it's mentioned in the context of a collaboration with another designer or manufacturer on a product. Based on what's presented in the article, plus SwisterTwister's search findings (or lack thereof), I don't think this company meets WP:CORP. —C.Fred (talk) 13:40, 18 October 2015 (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.
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 delete. Giving SPA votes less weight Spartaz Humbug! 22:24, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mind Riders Tech

[edit]
Mind Riders Tech (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Insufficient reliable sources as evidence of notability. A brief look for English language sources didnt uncover better quality sources than those used on the article. Perhaps there are better sources in local languages. John Vandenberg (chat) 11:07, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  11:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  11:43, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  11:43, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  11:44, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 09:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You already gave your opinion as "keep" above - please note that while it's fine to add more than one comment to this discussion, each user should only add one "vote" (such as keep or delete). --bonadea contributions talk 14:56, 30 October 2015 (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.
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 delete. SpinningSpark 11:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dumadu Games

[edit]
Dumadu Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable Indian game development company, SPA-created article. Ref #1 mentions the company in 2 sentences, with an annual revenue of $1 million (as of 2012/13). Ref #2 is a trivial company listing, ref #3 is a yourstory.com article (blacklisted, and not a reliable source to establish notability). A Google search found no other in-depth coverage. GermanJoe (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  01:34, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  01:34, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  01:35, 17 October 2015 (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.
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 Delete. --MelanieN (talk) 23:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

East India Natural Goods

[edit]
East India Natural Goods (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Easily speedy and PROD material with its current state and my searches simply found nothing better than this (passing mention only about founder, not even about the company), this and this. It's also worth noting it seems the company may've started this in July 2009 and it simply hasn't changed since then. Pinging taggers Dialectric and Calaka. SwisterTwister talk 23:06, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 23:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 23:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 23:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  23:26, 16 October 2015 (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.
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 delete. Black Kite (talk) 09:10, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sundaykart

[edit]
Sundaykart (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough independent reliable coverage for this to pass WP:GNG. sst✈ 16:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 16:19, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 16:19, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  16:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem with this page, why you people recommended to Delete This, the data in this page has good Quality If Any one specify the Problem then any one may Correct the Page, Please Explain the Problem and provide any solution to for not to deletion of this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Royalprince474 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC) — Royalprince474 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

— 49.205.20.163 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Royalprince474 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Phanendhra7 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
You have already told us once that you want the article kept. You are welcome to add further comments, but please don't post multiple bold "keep" notes. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:34, 22 October 2015 (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.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Companies/archive&oldid=1006065910"