Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Nordic


 * 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:31, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

New Nordic

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Speedy declined as not unambiguous advertising. Facts stated are all trivia. Company registered their trademark. Partner joined. Nothing but routine. Sources are all primary, with one exception: http://www.di.se/artiklar/2007/1/3/noteringsfest-vantas-2007/ a trivial mention from the Stockholm Stock Exchange. Promotional garbage like "a vital cornerstone for the company's onward growth". Main contributor has an undisclosed COI. Mduvekot (talk) 12:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:23, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:23, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:23, 16 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete the company only has 40 employees and is listed on a non-major stock exchange, it isn't notable that way. I've removed the worst promotional material, but it's still not notable, and the nom is correct that the article is mostly trivia. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:18, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Question: Can anyone find more reliable sources? A quick search gave me nothing, but that could be because of the name of the company. We can hardly build an article based on the sources presented right now. /Julle (talk) 11:11, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * delete fails GNG. KINDA PROMODlohcierekim (talk) 07:54, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

While I can see how i might have a COI this page was created solely to get the company on Wikipedia. So people could look it up and see through it's history, not for any marketing purposes. The New Nordic sources used to create the article is something they've released at an earlier date with all the information the public should want or need about them, but seeing as it's not available everywhere it was taken to Wikipedia. AdamScharff (talk) 09:36, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We really do not want to serve as a platform for corporate information. We need sources that are reliable, with a reputation for fact checking, and completely unrelated to the subject. Obviously the page was created to get the company on Wikipedia. The subject does not meet or general notability guideline.. "Not available elsewhere" is exactly my point. And, of course it has a promotional tone as it is sourced from the subject.Dlohcierekim (talk) 09:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - I have not found any independent reliable sources that discuss the company. If someone with a COI tells us the only information anyone would want or need to know about the company comes from the company itself and can't find any independent sources that is a good WP:BEFORE. ~ GB fan 10:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. I've removed puffery and unnecessary details too. -- HighKing ++ 17:00, 19 June 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.