Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Addnode Group: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:30, 29 December 2020

Revision as of 07:10, 30 December 2020

Line 25:

OK! The sources are similar to other company pages (which, I agree, does not have to mean that they are independent/notable). However I think that the combination of articles , interviews and some public company information is a solid base for this stub article. It provides useful information but lacks the breadth and coverage expected from an "full" wiki article - for that reason it should be classified as a stub. According to wiki guidlines a stub should only be deleted if it has little verifiable information, or if its subject has no apparent notability - which i do not think applies to the discussed article. On your sidenote, I was refering to that specific comment "stub may be all that is possible", which implies that a stub is a suitable form of the article. As for the WIP, that was my own interpretation of the word in the context. Thanks for the clarification about the voting process.[[User:Gustav Addnode|Gustav Addnode]] ([[User talk:Gustav Addnode|talk]]) 20:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

* {{u|Gustav Addnode}}, [[WP:OSE|other stuff exists]] regarding the sources on other articles, and interviews normally are not [[WP:INDEPENDENT|independent sources]], nor is "public company information". As [[WP:NCORP]] and [[WP:GNG]] clearly state, the company needs '''significant''' coverage in '''multiple''', '''reliable''' and '''independent''' sources to be presumed notable enough for inclusion. I will avoid !voting in this AfD as I have don't have the ability to run a search in Swedish, but I'd still like to address some of the points you make. ''[[User:JavaHurricane| <span style = "color:green">Java</span>]][[User talk:JavaHurricane|<span style = "color:red">Hurricane</span>]]'' 07:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)