Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roots industries


 * 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 no consensus. If the article should sit at a better title, the move can be done outside of the scope of this AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Roots industries

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The company lacks in-depth news coverage from WP:RS, fails WP:GNG. Meeanaya (talk) 13:31, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:07, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:07, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep but rename to Roots Industries, Roots Industries India or Roots Industries Group - not clear whether the article is about "... India" or "... Group", but certainly needs a capital "I". Article hasenough coverage in WP:RS to pass notability, though needs more work. 20 minutes after article creation seems too soon to take to AfD. And the newbie editor hadn't been given a "Welcome" message till I did so just now. Pam  D  08:28, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, per 's added information, or Draftify, was, and previously was . Doug Mehus (talk) 00:04, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename per Pam. A cursory search revealed enough RS to make a decent article, and the article already has enough RS to pass WP:GNG. No need to draftify as it is a functional stub.4meter4 (talk) 22:55, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Not a single one of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability and I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. This Time of India reference is classic churnalism based entirely on an interview. This from The Hindu is based on one and possibly two company announcements. This from Motor India Online is based on a company announcement.This from Auto Car Pro has no accredited journalist and is entirely based on information provided by the company. This from Auto Guide India is based on an interview with the chairman. All of those have no Independent Content and fail WP:ORGIND. Finally, this from The Hindu is a mere mention-in-passing and fails WP:CORPDEPTH.  HighKing++ 12:54, 19 November 2019 (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.