Talk:C.C.P Contact Probes

I endorse this acceptance of the Draft per WP:LISTED Legacypac (talk) 17:23, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Copied from AfC help desk
10:53:17, 15 October 2018 review of submission by Jole222[edit source] Jole222 (talk · contribs) (TB) Draft:C.C.P Contact Probes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, so my question is, what makes a company notable? I found about 100 different companies, that have a similar profile on Wikipedia as C.C.P. Contact Probes. The reason I am writing an article about it is, that it is a stock listed company and as such, a broader number of investors and the public have an interest in it. There is even a Wikipedia list of "stock listed companies of Taiwan". How can this list be complete if stock listed companies cant be submitted. As for myself, I wanted to buy the stock and didn't found any resources in English: For me a good opportunity to get into Wikipedia. I so far have only contributed on OpenStreetMap and I enjoy this kind of voluntary work. My question now would be. What does these companies make them notable for a Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulead_Systems https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mennekes_(Unternehmen) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVer_Information https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_Electronic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TECO_Electric_and_Machinery and so on... DGG also states that this seems to be a promotional article and I don't really understand at which point this article does promote the company. It pretty much only states the facts that I could find on different newspapers, financial data portals and the Annual Report. I hope you can help me to improve the article, as it is my first one. Thank you in advance!!! Jole222 (talk) 10:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

One problem is that everything in a company's annual report is normally unsuitable for Wikipedia. Generally financial portal information has the same problem. Another problem is the articles you are working off are not themselves suitable for Wikipedia either, but are already published. Not all companies listed on a stock exchange can also be listed on Wikipedia, although I understand the idea. A manufacturer like this is not a high profile company and does not have enough said about it in reliable sources such as newspapers to show notability. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 11:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Why is publically reported info as found in an Annual Report or on Financial websites not acceptable? All public companies listed on major stock exchanges are pretty much presumed notable per WP:LISTED. The regulations and reporting requirements of being listed, along with the financial press coverage that results pretty much assure there is sufficent info out there to support an article. Legacypac (talk) 15:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC) @Legacypac: Do you think TWSE listed companies are likely to survive AfD? As far as I can tell there are 917 companies listed, only 58 of which have articles on Wikipedia. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

The TWSE is a major stock exchange with a long history. Language is why we don't have more coverage of its constituents. There is a public benefit for Wikipedia to cover listed companies. People's savings and pensions are invested in them. They are often large scale employers (this subject has about 1000 employees), plus a company like this will support numerous other jobs at its suppliers. Such a company has a greater and more meaningful impact on the world than many article subjects. Compare to a little known state legislator (automatic notability) or someone who was in the Olympics once (automatic pass) but who we can hardly find info on. So yes, properly explained, any WP:LISTED company on a major exchange should pass AfD. Legacypac (talk) 16:34, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

DGG did reject it, but I have have approved the article now regardless. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:51, 15 October 2018 (UTC)