Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kesoram Industries Ltd.


 * 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. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  07:11, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Kesoram Industries Ltd.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of any notability. The two refs confirm that the company exists and that it issued a press release about a potential merger. Nothing else. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk 11:46, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete It exists. No significant coverage whatsoever in independent reliable sources.  ron az Talk!  12:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Actually, on balance keep - a quick GNews search found as well as pages and pages of what appears to be actual coverage of their business dealings. The present article is terrible and needs rebuilding from the ground up, but I think they may indeed be not only notable, but noted - David Gerard (talk) 18:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, on balance keep - a quick GNews search found as well as pages and pages of what appears to be actual coverage of their business dealings. The present article is terrible and needs rebuilding from the ground up, but I think they may indeed be not only notable, but noted - David Gerard (talk) 18:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: The company was founded in 1919, and it makes a good number of quality sources inaccessible on web. There are PR and ROUTINE coverage, but that is not all. There are sources like this one and hits on Google Books. Anup   [Talk]  05:06, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * See related Articles for deletion/Kesoram Rayon. I would recommend a merge here, if the main article is kept. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and redirected that subsidiary article -- subsidiary in both senses of the word -- to this main one. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:50, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: The company is notable and the article provides adequate coverage (though can be improved). In addition, additional sources would help to solidify the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newtonslaw40 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 28 September 2016 (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.