Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K. A. Malle Pharmaceuticals Limited

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. unsourced and unverified Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:50, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

K. A. Malle Pharmaceuticals Limited[edit]

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

I can't seem to find any significant coverage for this company. All I see on Google is business directory listings, and there's only one news hit in the archives, which is paid access only. —fetch ·comms 01:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment An anon editor left the following comment, which seems to be relevant to this discussion, on the article's talk page: The company is very famous in the pharmaceutical industry. It holds more than 80% of the worlds market in the product named mebendazole. ChemNerd (talk) 12:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If the statements in the article are accurate, I don't think there is an issue of this company meeting the notability requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. However, there appears to be an issue of verifiability. I can't find significant coverage in independent sources (admittedly, from a brief Google search). ChemNerd (talk) 12:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: there is coverage on Google with "ltd." instead of "limited". Dewritech (talk) 15:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Dewritech (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's true that this company may be "notable" in the non-WP sense of the word; but unless someone can come up with examples of substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources, its notability for our purposes is not established. I'm certainly not seeing any such coverage online. Deor (talk) 23:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is an API manufacturing plant and provides drug intermediates. It manufactures Mebendazole and holds 80% of the world market. If this company would be a extreem retail company like Cipla, Cadila, or any other company, than its name would have be in the new somewhere. But being a seller to retail companies its name is hidden in the market. But the company is very well known to the tablet manufacturers who manufacture final products of Mebendazole, Albendazole, and many more. This company is even well known to the people who study about products like mebendazole and albendazole. If buy-chance u know a person about who has medicinel knowledge about "Deworming", than he defiantly has to know about this company. As you know that no company provides its data but this is a link where you can buy the companies data and find it through it "http://panjiva.com/K-A-Malle-Pharmaceuticals-Ltd/3905237". If you think that this information is more than enough, than please keep this article and If you want any other information than just leave the message... Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabhpodar (talk • contribs)
Comment an anon added a section to the help desk: Wikipedia:Help_desk#No_response_regarding_my_article. I don't understand it due to confusino with quote marks and such. Kayau Voting IS evil 09:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable company, fails WP:CORP. Ghits minor and do not amount to "significant coverage". ukexpat (talk) 16:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Rishabhpodar claims here and on the article talk page that they have 80% market share in Mebendazole, but I find no evidence of that. This Google search gets quite a few hits, though I'm unsure how many are reliable or relevant - most of the links I clicked on were business listings pages with the address and a sometimes a brief profile. As for the link provided by Rishabhpodar, I'm certainly not prepared to pay $49 for some report of dubious value as a source for the article. On the article talk page, I have encouraged the author to look for references in reliable sources, per the guideline. Astronaut (talk) 05:53, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As you say that you are not prepared to pay $49 for the report is it fine if i provide you the report of the total sales of the product by sending you the copy on your email id that will be given by you as i have subscribed for the data and i receive it every alternate month. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabhpodar (talk • contribs) 07:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To judge from the same site's sample report, I really doubt a credit report and lists of customers, products and shipping stats will indicate notability. For example, how can readers verify that they have a 80% marketshare in Mebendazole, and that it is not just some figure made up by you. If they really are notable, surely they would be mentioned many times in The Times of India, Dainik Bhaskar or in business nwspapers such as Mint, or The Economic Times, etc.. Astronaut (talk) 08:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment K. A. Malle Pharmaceuticals Limited is an Reliable & Renowned company in Pharmaceutical Field in India, May be the companies face value is less when compared to other Pharmaceutical filed players like Cipla & Ranbaxy. We should not delete article by just searching on google & concluding ourself that this company dont deserve to be in wikipedia. I have added Reliable Reference from Pharmaceutical Export Promotion Council pharmexcil.com,Set-up by Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Govt of India. May be we can put article as Stub Class & ask the user to add & more reference to improce the article.It's easy to put Deletion Tag on Article's Page, but before that we should try to help & encourage people's effort to write article by adding references ourself. Raj6644 (talk) 08:31, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the only details the Pharmaceutical Export Promotion Council has is the address and phone numbers. Astronaut (talk) 08:33, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Being listed under Government of India's Pharmaceutical Export Promotion Council itself is more than enough to tell about the credential of the Company. Yes, pharmexcil has only contact details. When the company is listed Government of India's website it's more than enough to tell about the company to outside world. AS i have already told that we should not delete article by just searching on google & concluding ourself that this company dont deserve to be in wikipedia. There are so many companies like RKM Powergen Ltd, a Chennai based billion crores Who even dont have a website but still they are major players in Power Generation in India. Raj6644 (talk) 09:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is more about the verifiability of what is written in the article. While it is true not every company has an internet presence, it seems this "major player" has escaped any attention from Indian newspapers, business journals, TV and radio stations (most of whom do have an internet presence and more importantly employ journalists with a track record in checking the facts). Surely there must be something that shows more than the company's address, something that backs up the article's claim of notability. Astronaut (talk) 13:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a decent amount of references to prove my point. You can see the article. Rishabhpodar (talk) 09:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good Work Rishabhpodar. Keep working to improve it. Astronaut, I guess even Quality Certification details for the Company like

Certificate No: QMS/C1144/0995

Issue Date: 3-Jun-2008

Expiry Date: 22-May-2011

Scope: Manufacture & Exports of Bulk Drugs & Pharma Intermediates

are provided for the article. i hope it is better for the survival of the article.
From this point i feel like some moderators are discouraging people creating article & suppressing new comers by showing dominance. Newcomers are like our brothers, we should help them instead of punishing them. Raj6644 (talk) 05:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Astronaut don't you think that these many reliable sources are more than enough to keep this article in Wikipedia?. As you know that there are many articles like this , this , this and many more.... which dosent have enough references, yet they are there on wikipedia. Yet you think that K A Malle should be considered for deletion? If you think so than i feel that this is wrong what you are doing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabhpodar (talk • contribs) 18:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, no, I don't think these sources "...are more than enough to keep this article in Wikipedia". Looking at each of them: Ref 1 simply gives the address and phone numbers, Ref 2 confirms they manufacture mebendazole and suggests they made 3 shipments to North America (and if I follow the link I am invited to pay $49 for a report about the company's shipments), Ref 3 is genuinely useful in verifying their ISO 9001:2000 accreditation, Ref 4 just gives their address unless I pay $514.99 for more info about the comapny's creditworthiness, and finally Ref 5 is useful in listing the company's products. But... where are the news articles or corporate announcements saying an R&D facility has opened, where are the business journal articles that say the company has 80% marketshare, where is the evidence for the ISO 14001:2004 certification, other certificates like WHO GMP, DMF, REACH? Just because there are other articles with few references is not a reason to keep this article. Lastly, there is nothing wrong in agreeing with the proposed deletion of an article about a company that does not meet the criteria laid out in Wikipedia's guideline on the notability of companies. Astronaut (talk) 04:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Astronaut Ref 1 is the export promotion council of India and it lists only those companies on their website who are the members of the Pharmexcil. Ref 2 is the website from where you can buy the shipment details of a company. this link shows the list of mebendazole manufacturers in a sequence and the website as you can see is featured in the New York times and Wallstreet journel. The data given by it is defiantly true. If you want i can upload the shippment details for the month of Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr in excel format and i have removed the 80% tag as coudent give you more references regarding this.Through this link one can easily come to know that K. A. Malle is the largest manufacturer in the world. Ref 4 gives the information that the company is a member of Dun & Bradstreet as you know that this website only keeps the name of companies who are the registered members of D&B. As far as ISO 14001:2004 is concerned, i can attach the certificate if you say so. As you know that if a company is not listed on the BSE_Sensex due to which all the corporate announcements are not seen. As far as R&D facility is considered i have given the reference of the companies official website where the company has specified about its R&D facility. DMF as you know is a file (Thick book containing 500 or 600 pages) this is never published on the web. I can give you the code number of the DMF if you want. Please feel free to contact it you feel that there are some clarifications are require regarding this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabhpodar (talk • contribs) 07:30, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have pdf files of ISO 9000, 14000, D&B and Gujarat chemical association. Can i upload these files on wikimapia and link to this article for referances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabhpodar (talk • contribs) 14:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You used "as you know..." a couple of times in the above post. In fact I don't know any of these facts. As a reader, I have to rely on the sources provided in the article.

In my opinion, the problem with the data provided by Panjiva.com is not whether it is true or reliable or used by the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, but is it significant to the article? What does it actually say: That K A Malle has made three shipments of mebendazole to the USA since July 2007 and that is the same number of shipments as Autiyuq and Ida Foundation. From what I can see, it doesn't say they are the world's largest supplier of this product or what their marketshare is. I really don't see what paying $49 for details of shipments (or using your own spreadsheet of data presumably dervied from that data) would add here.

I also very much doubt it is automatically true that if Dun & Bradstreet think a company is creditworthy then they are notable eoungh to meet WP:CORP. The lack of a listing on the Bombay Stock Exchange could be seen as a problem for this article, especially for a company that is supposed to be a major player in Indian pharmaceuticals manufacturing. As for DMF, I've never heard of it before now. Astronaut (talk) 09:54, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep One of the factors that makes companies notable is their importance within a particular industry, also known as market share. To consider this as significant for a single product out of a whole product line is a bit of a stretch. and I am not sure I would do it here except for the consideration of cultural bias: Indian sources in general are very poorly indexed and are not consistently found on the web.

But with respect to bias against new articles, there are probably tens or even hundreds of thousands of articles about topics in India that we need--a sensible way to go about it would be to go with what sources are available--for example, those companies that are subjects of articles in findable sources. DGG ( talk ) 20:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you It would be great if you would keep this article on the cultural basis. Thank you so much!!!!!!! for not deleting my article from wikipedia. Please can you remove the deletion tag from the article....Thank you..Rishabhpodar (talk • contribs) 09:57, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, the problem I have with the sources provided so far is not really their reliability, but what they actually say about this company. Listing their address, simply says they exist. Listing shipping details, simply says they ship a product to international customers like their competitors do. And a D&B listing, appears to suggest they are creditworthy. None of the references actually verifies much what is in the article - the company's history, the company's marketshare, etc. Astronaut (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

just give me some more time and ill give you more information. Is it ok if i upload companies pdf files in wikimedia and link those pdf's for references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabhpodar (talk • contribs) 14:14, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I find no significant coverage in reliable sources. Nuujinn (talk) 19:00, 17 July 2010 (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.