Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/INFINITT Healthcare


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. I see a consensus to Keep this article and a weak deletion nomination statement. Liz Read! Talk! 04:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

INFINITT Healthcare

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Stub created by a paid account, seemingly no notability whatsoever. ahmetlii ✉ (Please ping me on a reply!) 08:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Technology,  and South Korea. ahmetlii ✉ (Please ping me on a reply!) 08:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  14:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak delete: As a public KOSDAQ company, coverage exists. This would appear to scrape notability for companies, but sourcing I could locate is way too dependent on press releases such as https://www.arabnews.com/ejada-and-infinitt-forge-health-care-links.  CherryPie94  &#x1F352;&#x1f967; (talk) 22:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC) - Weak keep  CherryPie94  &#x1F352;&#x1f967; (talk) 07:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Needs searches in the Korean language. Try googling "인피니트헬스"; you get much more results. I am mindful of the fact that the page is tainted by a paid creator, but it doesn't read excessively complimentary to me on a quick glance. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 11:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * [1] and [6] are press release, [2] is about the CEO, and I have reservation on [3] and [4] as routine stock coverage. [5] is good and I did not see it before: changing my vote. CherryPie94  &#x1F352;&#x1f967; (talk) 07:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: while the article is short and incomplete I do believe the subject itself doesn't violet the notability guidelines for companies as it is a a public company with some coverage, but it should be improved and expanded. EncyclopediaEditorXIV (talk) 14:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.