Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lek (pharmaceutical company)


 * 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 redirect to Sandoz. I ask to do the merge.  DGG ( talk ) 16:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Lek (pharmaceutical company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (organizations) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Eleassar with the following rationale "there are only two notable Slovenian pharmaceutical companies: Lek and Krka". Saying its is notable is a fallacy (WP:ITSNOTABLE. The fact that there are two 'big' Slovenian companies in foo business doesn't make either one notable. Either there is coverage of its significance or there is none. And so far there is none. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Piotr, what would you like me to provide? If the criterion is 'significant coverage in reliable sources', there's plenty of material, you'd only need five minutes to verify that. --Eleassar my talk 05:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Linking to Google hits is not sufficient. Your English links seem to be exclusive press releases like . That's routine business coverage, self-published and of the lowest possible quality. You need to find sources that are reliable and provide in-depth coverage. See for example Talk:Krka (company) were I cited sources that suggest this is a notable company. I was unable to find such quality sources for Lek, which leads me to believe this one is not notable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  06:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I see. Well, if you prefer a book, why don't you simply write 'Lek company' in Google Books? E.g. or . --Eleassar my talk 07:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Those are quite promising. Let's hear a few more comments, but you might have saved this article with your finds. Good job. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:50, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  19:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  19:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  19:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment While can be pretty easily shown that the company is notable, the article is rubbish - a single sentence? I may work on it a bit at some point. --Tone 21:10, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect and merge to Sandoz -- HighKing ++ 12:30, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Sandoz, which seems like the obvious answer, now that HighKing's said it. --Lockley (talk) 06:00, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - as I have now added some basic content. Lek, although being a part of a bigger corporation, is still an important player nationally. --Tone 18:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * merge and redirect claims that it is "important" are not supported by RS here. handwavy claims are not OK in AfDs. Jytdog (talk) 01:14, 10 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.