Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pandox


 * 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. I find the consensus is to Keep this article after recent improvements to it. Liz Read! Talk! 21:58, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Pandox

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

Despite the impressive refbombing, the sources don't actually provide the RS sigcov required for notability. They are all routine business reporting, capsule profiles and close primary sources, with the one exception being the Affärsvärlden analyst piece, but that alone is nowhere near enough; a search finds nothing better. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies,  and Sweden. DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment hits all over the place, the web, the NYT, but it's all about them buying a property, the CEO does xyz thing. Large enough company, there should be something for them. Oaktree b (talk) 15:53, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep A case study here in a business journal, paywalled, but I think it's ok and another here . Oaktree b (talk) 15:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:02, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I have now added a few editorial sources from Swedish and international newspapers such as Dagens Industri, The New York Times, The Financial Times, and The Irish Times, to better establish the notability of Pandox. I am happy to continue searching for relevant sources if anyone still feels that the notability of the topic is uncertain.Carl Gronwall 5 (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep - After improvements made after nom, pretty clear WP:GNG met.BabbaQ (talk) 06:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I think should be kept due to its notability and sourcing but it can be improved. Suffolkshire (talk) 14:44, 15 October 2022 (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.