Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dade Behring


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure)  Rcsprinter  (talk)  18:19, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Dade Behring

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete. Insufficient notability. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 18:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep If the NYTimes thinks its acquisition by Siemens is of such importance as to justify an article on that, the company is notable.  DGG ( talk ) 01:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * WP notability guidelines are not dependant on whether a NYT article exists. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 01:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * comment &mdash; funny, i thought that that's exactly what the satisfaction of notability guidelines did depend on. significant coverage in reliable sources is just another way to spell new york times in most circles. &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 07:23, 17 September 2011 (UTC)


 * keep &mdash; it's not just an article from the gray lady here, clicking on the find sources generated news link up there at the top gives 686 hits, from a span of at least 10 years, including such sources as the chicago tribune, the sun-times, reuters, and the chicago daily herald. easily meets gng. &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 07:23, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is plenty of coverage of the organization in reliable and independent sources- including the New York Times and Chicago Tribune. Some sources worth looking at are, (passing mention in relation to a presidential candidate), , , , . The company was widely noted for its financial struggling a few years ago, and then for its rapid recovery marked by its growing revenue and rapidly rising stock prices. Per WP:LISTED, most companies listed on major stock exchanges (in this case it was listed on NASDAQ) are usually notable. I could probably find more sources, but I think that the ones I have listed are good enough for this AfD.--Slon02 (talk) 16:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep – Per available reliable sources that establish notability of the topic (see above). It appears that the nominator may not have followed the guidelines listed in WP:BEFORE for source searching prior to nominating this article for deletion, which, if true, nullifies the basis of nomination for deletion. There's no mention in the nomination regarding the availability of reliable sources.Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:50, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - See this, many news articles about the topic. Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.