Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petzone


 * 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. I don't see the keep arguments as convincing in the face of the source analysis, which is rather damning. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Petzone

 * – ( View AfD View log )

non-notable company, sourced to press releases and WP:MILL "coverage" if you can even call it that, as well as black hat SEO. VAXIDICAE💉 18:05, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kuwait-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete As per nom, non-notable company, all sources are press releases, fails WP:GNG. Pilean (talk) 07:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable in the Kuwaiti context. About a dozen locations isn't bad for a small country like Kuwait, and is also in major mainstream news like the Kuwait Times. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no Kuwaiti context, there is Wikipedia. And it's not notable in Wikipedia context because it's all press releases. Kuwait Times is a listicle with nothing of value about the subject. VAXIDICAE💉  17:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete I am unable to locate any deep or significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 12:50, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Barely passes WP:GNG, not strong refs but seems enough to pass GNG like Gulf News, Kuwait News Agency, Kuwait Times, Bayut, Khaleej Times and more. Grailcombs (talk) 18:07, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * All of which are press releases, which means it's not coverage nor is it independent. VAXIDICAE💉  18:11, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Doesn't matter - GNG is the wrong guideline. For companies, the correct guideline is WP:NCORP which is recognised as being stricter than GNG, so if Grailcombs believes is "barely" passed GNG, it has no chance of passing NCORP.  HighKing++ 11:16, 4 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Enough coverage and meets the notability criteria for a company article. RedElephanty (talk) 17:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, "enough coverage" isn't one of the criteria - can you post a link to any single reference that you believe meets the "notability criteria"? Ta. Also, a *Question - I notice that you have very few edits and yet you created the article in one edit. For a newbie editor, that is very unusual - to have managed to create an article with links and references with no futher editing. Very unusual (did I say that already?). Have you ever edited Wikipedia previously? Do you have a connection with the company?  HighKing++ 11:21, 4 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I'd like to note for the closer that none of the keeps here have provided any policy based arguments and their statement that there is sufficient sourcing can easily be demonstrated to be incorrect, see below. VAXIDICAE💉  13:56, 4 April 2021 (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.