Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gibraltar Industries


 * 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.  So Why  07:45, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Gibraltar Industries

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. What coverage I could find is minor and routine. Insufficient in-depth coverage in independent RS. MB 16:14, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment – Of note is that this is a WP:LISTED company. See: . North America1000 17:08, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * It is not listed on a major exchange like the NYSE, it is only on NASDAQ, one of over 3200. MB 17:51, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Per the NASDAQ article, "It is the second-largest exchange in the world by market capitalization, behind only the New York Stock Exchange". Clearly a major exchange. North America1000 21:58, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Per the same article, NASDAQ has three tiers of listing. It has an overall large market capitalization because it includes large companies like Intel and Apple in the top tier. But a small company like Gibraltar in the bottom tier is not equivalent to being in the NYSE. I don't think being on NASDAQ makes a company automatically notable.  There are thousands of small-cap companies that don't get much coverage. MB 05:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - NASDAQ is generally considered a major exchange. The existing sources aren't sufficient  has some information on the company. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:10, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per a previous editor, coverage by wide spectrum analytics such as Bloomberg and a listing on the NASDAQ do not confer notability. Per WP:LISTED, the fact that no other sources are cited indicates to me that the company is not notable. SamHolt6 (talk) 00:36, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG. References fail WP:CORPDEPTH. Odd but it wouldn't be the first listed company that turns out doesn't meet the criteria for notability. -- HighKing ++ 17:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I thought this would be easy to show notability but all I find are mentions, not significant coverage, even in Google book searches. Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 20:09, 20 July 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.