Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FEBC 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 delete. ST47 (talk) 01:18, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

FEBC International

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Borderline G11 case, all coverage in independent sources is either database listings or ebullient coverage in sketchy trade publications. Does not meet WP:NCORP, WP:GNG. Previously nominated for PROD by, dePROD by initial editor. signed,Rosguill talk 23:32, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. signed,Rosguill talk 23:32, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. signed,Rosguill talk 23:32, 21 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete As Rosguill notes there is no evidence of notability. There is no indication that the Supply Chain article is a reliable source and it is, by far, the best available source for this topic. As such fails NCORP/GNG. Barkeep49 (talk) 23:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, I agree with Rosguill, the article fails WP:GNG, Alex-h (talk) 16:19, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep, the fact that it is the ONLY firm in the world that provides ISO-certified hospitality procurement services makes the entity notable, doesn't it? More references are added to the page to improve the third-party sources. Bharat.Contributes (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , there's no indication that being an ISO-certified hotel is important or notable. The fact that they received that certification in 2015 and no other company appears to have felt it necessary to follow suit is somewhat telling. signed,Rosguill talk 17:21, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , they're not a hotel. I would request you to please read the article first before making claims on its notability. I also think you're being subjective with the notability guideline here as I think being the only company that has it is inherently notable. Is it important in the hospitality business? Maybe. But I think it is notable when they're the only one who can do something. Let me know what you think and please read the article. Bharat.Contributes (talk) 05:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Believe me, I read the article when I first nominated it. I didn't say that the company was a hotel, I said that there's no evidence that hotels care about ISO-certification. At any rate, if this certification was that important, there would be articles written about it that don't read like ads. Such sources are currently conspicuously absent from the article, and the rest of the internet as well when I tried to look for them. Finally, remember that notability ≠ importance on Wikipedia, it's a specific term that refers to the level of coverage about a subject in reliable sources. Even if ISO-certification was extremely important, if no one has written about this company in a reliable source, there's no way we can write a Wikipedia article about it. signed,Rosguill talk 07:31, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * if you read the comment you posted, it is very easy to comprehend you meant the company was a hotel which you're trying to backtrack now. Your other points are valid but you definitely meant the company was a hotel and the fact that instead of owning your mistake, you're back pedelling because of ego. Thanks for your comments, if I find more reliable sources I'll add it to the article and we can arrive at a consensus when this discussion expires. Bharat.Contributes (talk) 12:04, 26 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete None of the current sourcing meets WP:CORPDEPTH standards, and I can't find anything that does. I don't see anything in any of the notability guidelines that suggests that meeting ISO standards is notable in and of itself, even if a company is the only one in its sector to do so (and I'm not seeing any reliable independent sourcing to say that it is the only one that does). Fails WP:NCORP. Girth Summit  (blether)  06:47, 27 June 2019 (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.