Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salmat


 * 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. Sam Walton (talk) 13:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Salmat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Basically just a company advert for a non-notable company. Fails WP:GNG, WP:CORP and WP:PROMO. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:55, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  00:03, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  00:03, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete by WP:GNG Shad in Net 01:28, 19 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shad Innet (talk • contribs)
 * Delete for now and draft to a willing user's userspace as my searches found several results but nothing that appears solid here (News, results fade page 3), here, here ("leading multi-channel communications and customer services company") and here. SwisterTwister   talk  18:58, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - this is nothing more than an advert for a privately-held, non-publicly-traded corporation. We are not a free webhost. Bearian (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 ( Talk ) 14:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment actually Bearian, that's not correct, the company is public traded on the ASX. Adpete (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, poor article content is not a valid deletion reason. This company clearly meets WP:GNG as is evidenced by numerous articles in the Fairfax Media publications. There are over 8,000 mentions of the company in Factiva over 30 years. A search of EBSCOhost's Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre yields over 400 results. Obviously not all of these results are significant coverage but there are many many examples. Hack (talk) 12:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.   <li></li> <li> The article notes: "Australia's largest direct mailer and call centre operator, Salmat, capped-off its first nine months as a listed company yesterday by beating its prospectus targets in all departments."</li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Salmat to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 20:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC) </li></ul>


 * Keep – Meets WP:CORPDEPTH, per a review of the sources provided above. North America1000 02:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - I support what northamerican1000 writes Alec Station (talk) 09:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per the sources Cunard has found, good job. GuzzyG (talk) 18:14, 4 July 2015 (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.