Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SHI Mediwear

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. Those arguing keep have not addressed the issues with the sources identified by the nominator, and supported by some of those voting delete. GirthSummit _(blether) 13:02, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SHI Mediwear[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)

No sources with significant coverage, either in the footnotes or via Google. Fails the notability guidelines. Largoplazo (talk) 16:17, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Largoplazo (talk) 16:17, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Largoplazo (talk) 16:17, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Largoplazo (talk) 16:17, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the reason in my PROD. SK2242 (talk) 16:50, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some sources of SHI
Keep I think the DRDO, Delhi Government and FICCI are more reliable than a newspaper or book.

DRDO approved and mostly use SHI's garments https://www.drdo.gov.in/sites/default/files/inline-files/SHI%20MEDIWEAR%20_UCC.pdf.

Delhi Government gave permission to open SHI in the lockdown and purchased 30,000 PPE Kits when the COVID-19 was on the peek.

FICCI invites SHI to become a member of their committee https://www.shimediwear.com/certificate/Mr.%20Praveen%20Gulati.pdf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulgulati1985 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't independent sources, which is part of the requirement for establishing notability. Largoplazo (talk) 12:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It appears that User:Rahulgulati1985 has a COI from being one of the Key People at the company: link (and there's some WP:SPA going on for other votes here...) MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 01:37, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable Finnish company. Article needs some rewriting but isn't the spammiest I've ever seen.Murad9711 (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish? It isn't Finnish. Largoplazo (talk) 18:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep People are perfectly happy to keep an article about some random cookie brand with similar issues and reference list, so it shouldn't be an issue to keep this one either Sakilmurad (talk) 04:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid keep rationale Sakilmurad. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. SK2242 (talk) 10:19, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 03:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Promotional article, lacks in-depth coverage in independent sources (despite the WP:REFBOMB). MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:58, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- per nom. No notable. Kolma8 (talk) 15:56, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly not notable, and the article is arguably TNT material. Blablubbs|talk 00:39, 26 December 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.