Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marius Pharmaceuticals


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  00:43, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Marius Pharmaceuticals

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

The most neutrally written and interesting section Marius Pharmaceuticals has nothing to do with the company itself. PROMO and SPA piece ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine,  and North Carolina.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Shushugah Hi there. I am not sure why this article was nominated for deletion as Marius Pharmaceuticals is a legitimate pharmaceutical company and has an FDA-approved product. Also, the #Testosterone and Hypogonadism section does have to do with the company considering the company developed a drug for hypogonadism. Thanks Lwash711 (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lwash711 I have no doubt it is a legitimate FDA approved company. The question is whether it's WP:notable and has enough in depth secondary sources that are not tied/associated with the company itself. Otherwise we would simply create a script to generate an article for every single company with approved drugs by the FDA. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:53, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lwash711, you are the creator of the article, and in your comment on the first post you say: " -- Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard -- I created a page for my company". The problem there is "for my company." Please see WP:COI. Lamona (talk) 02:52, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:36, 29 April 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Specific analysis of the proposed sources would be very helpful. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: This article needs work but my quick Google search showed enough sources to establish notability. Since articles that have the potential to be improved and/or that have sources that can be added to be kept, rather than deleted, my recommendation is to keep. Rublamb (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Rublamb can you share 1-2 sources? I double checked, because I get it wrong sometimes. But I still could not find a single newspaper article, book or scholarly mention that isn't a mere press release or short mention of their FDA approval. I found 3 book mentions all before 2017 when it was founded, which are false alerts. Can you share the best sources youn found directly then? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Shushugah: I have posted some here Talk:Marius Pharmaceuticals#Possible Sources. There are more drug studies in the Wikipedia Library but I selected the two that seemed to mention the business the most. Rublamb (talk) 18:06, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG. The best sources I can find are this and this, two minor local pieces about an activity of one of the company's subsidiaries. There's also this and this from WRALTechwire, which while they are more focused on the company itself, like the previous articles are little more than churnalism from WRAL-TV news' local business-booster child. -Indy beetle (talk) 20:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment Most sources in peer-reviewed journals are about pharmaceuticals the company makes, studying how they work. I suppose we could take the number of mentions of the company's products in those journals as some measure of notability, but I'm not sure.
 * Oaktree b (talk) 02:10, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete I appreciate Rublamb's source-finding, however from the looks of it none of them meed WP:SIGCOV. I echo Shushugah's request for Rublamb to pick out a few of the sources that they think are the best. JML1148 (Talk &#124; Contribs) 07:42, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a company therefore GNG/NCORP applies which requires in-depth "Independent Content" about *the company* from multiple sources. I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. The references mentioned above do not discuss the company in any depth, most are mentions-in-passing or straight-up PR/Announcements.  HighKing++ 16:21, 8 May 2023 (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.