Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NIlit


 * 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The result was   nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  17:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

NIlit

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject of the article is only notable for one thing. Armbrust Talk  Contribs  16:08, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment The company name, per the article, is "Nilit, Ltd.," but the article has an uppercase I in the title, making it read the same as "NLLit" in the typical Wikipedia font. Normally we don't move articles to another title during an AFD, but in this case I suggest it be moved to the  title of Nilit Ltd. because if someone searches for refs for "NLLit" they will not find any relevant to this company. Edison (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep It is a company operating in many countries, and has press coverage (Where it is shown as "Nilit Ltd." or "Nilit") expected of a major international company, as found in Google News Archive, such as Inteletex, 6 June 2006 "Fibers on the rise", with a couple of paragraphs indicating the company is a major one in its product, along with typical articles about acquisitions of other companies such as "Israeli company buys Nylstar (2009) which says they are "one of the world's largest nylon 6.6 producers for the apparel industry." See "Nilit strengthens presence in Chinese market" Knitting Industry News (2009), "Nilit Strengthens Presence and Position in Chinese Market" Yarns and Fibers (2007), "NILIT/ EURONIL New compounding plant in Italy/ Capacity of 7,000 t/y for PA compounds" Plasteurope.com (1996, "Israeli firm names Triad textile executive to head North America operations" The Business Journal (2007), "Nylon maker to open China operations" The Business Journal (2008). Multiple independent and reliable sources with significant coverage, so notability seems satisfied. Edison (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2011 (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.