Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hussain 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 no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  21:19, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hussain Industries

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No in-depth coverage in WP:RS. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG.  Greenbörg  (talk)  17:19, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:28, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:28, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:31, 10 August 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Note that seven new sources were added to the article on 16 August 2017.
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG, references do not establish notability. -- HighKing ++ 18:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The company is listed on Pakistan Stock Exchange and is a large textile manufacturer. I added 7 new references today. It was unreferenced since 2009. Ngrewal1 (talk) 22:11, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Being listed is not a guarantee of notability. The references you added fail WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND as they are normal business-as-usual references and company announcements. Can you find a reference that doesn't rely on company-produced material? -- HighKing ++ 13:46, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: Majority of the sources added are showing that the company is listed which has nothing to do with notability, especially of a company.  Greenbörg  (talk)  11:49, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Reply I ask both of you gentlemen to please reconsider. I myself have been trading stocks on the New York Stock Exchange since 1983. My impression is that these stock exchanges review the company's records before agreeing to list them on the exchange. Pakistan Stock Exchange, admittedly very very small compared to the world's largest NY exchange, still has a company review procedure in place before they agree to list them. Would a major business newspaper like Financial Times of United Kingdom give it any coverage if the company were not sizeable and notable locally in Pakistan? All my given references are not local. One given reference is a German website about the company exhibiting at the Frankfurt Textile Fair. It's eventually your judgement and decision. I thought I would write a few words to defend my edited work. Ngrewal1 (talk) 19:31, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Reply On a second thought, I just clicked on your above-given Wikipedia link about 'Depth of coverage' and read it. I did not see any mention of stock quotes from international markets being called 'a mere mention' or 'trivial'. We all know business stock quotes are very brief for all companies - large or small. I am asking you for a suggestion for my future editing whether I should discontinue using them ? Thinking back, I recall that I only decided to edit the article because it was 'unreferenced' since June 2009. If asked by Wikipedia, I will suggest in their online surveys not to even accept articles without references to begin with. It will lighten everyone's workload here on Wikipedia. Ngrewal1 (talk) 23:29, 17 August 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.