Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exotica International


 * 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 redirect to Nikki Haley. I'll also be merging some of the content in my capacity as an editor.  Sandstein  07:37, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Exotica International

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't appear to pass WP:CORP. Successful enough small company, but there doesn't appear to be much significant coverage about the company. Notoriety seems more linked to the fact that the found is Nikki Haley's mother. The Economist almost has enough, but the coverage about the business is secondary to the article. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC) Niteshift36 (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep This is this is not merely "Nikki Haley's mother"'s company, it is the company that employed both Nikki Haley and her husband Michael Haley until she entered politics. I created this article, rather than stuff information about this company into Haley's article, and also because it could be linked from the article about her husband.  Note that the search bar verifies copious sourcing not yet in the article, both from fairly extensive coverage in the press in India, and in Haley's published campaign biography, Can’t is Not an Option. So, while it may not fit the usual model of WP:CORP, it does pass WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:36, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Please note that I didn't say that it was merely "Nikki Haley's Mother's" company. I said it was a successful small company, but the notoriety seems linked to Nikki. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:55, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:55, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:55, 4 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Note To be clear, Haley worked for this company during her tenure in the state legislature, leaving when elected Governor. The article is, imho, reasonable well-sourced; and the info in should be WP:PRESERVED (usefulness to our users is indicated by the hundreds of hits it get daily.  It could, I suppose, be merged into Nikki Haley, but that article is already long and growing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:26, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Nikki_Haley -- not independently notable. A few sentences or a short paragraph can be added there; this will also preserve the article history, and anything useful can be picked up from there. What makes this interesting is "daughter of immigrants", "Indian-American politician", so it's best covered in Ms Haley's article. The section on the family is quite short, so this addition would improve the target article. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:03, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that details on the company are WP:RSed: founding date, what they sold, annual revenue. Multiple stories in reliable media, by no means all of them about Nikki Haley (South Carolina media covered the company; I found multiple, additional non-Nikki sources about the pre-political career in a news archives search).  But notability that results in part from having  CFO become a notable politician - so that the corporate history gets written up in The New York Times and The Economist (substantively, albeit as part of a profile of Haley,) is notability.  Even if she is a Republican, a Trump appointee, and a probable future candidate.  In fact, especially because of that.  Haley is young (well, compared to Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump she's young,) and interest in her is intense.  The Nikki Haley article will grow, making this a logical fork.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The article in the Economist about Nikki that mentions the company (or time she worked there) is coverage about Nikki, not the company. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:SIGCOV : "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. "E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:24, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * In response, I have edited the page to make the significance that The Economist attributes to working in Mom's shop in shaping Haley's political ideas clear.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:14, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware that it doesn't have to be the focus, but it's quite peripheral. If an article talks about how much influence the little league baseball coach had and how lessons of leadership were learned on the field, that little league team doesn't become notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It is, in fact, not "peripheral" to the article in the Economist; as editors can read for themselves.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:19, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 00:26, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable Redirect to Nikki_Haley. The fact that it's closed makes it highly unlikely to ever achieve notability. Ifnord (talk) 16:51, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that this company continues to accrue notability because Nikki Haley regularly gives major speeches where she says stuff like, ""They loved the fact that only in America could we be as successful as we wanted to be and nothing would stand in our way,... My parents started a business out of the living room of our home and, 30-plus years later, it was a multi-million dollar company.", and because public interest in the family business and the temptation to do as the The Economist did and write about how the business shaped her political philosophy will continue to grow as long as her name continues to be mentioned for national office. (Note that the article gets ~20,000 page views per month).  I continue to see this as a practical content fork for Nikki Haley E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:35, 16 April 2017 (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.