Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Savita Oil Technologies Limited


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Szzuk (talk) 12:13, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Savita Oil Technologies Limited

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fairly promotional article about a company, sourced exclusively to company profile and ROUTINE announcements, press releases and similar. I'm not able to find anything that approaches WP:CORPDEPTH, so believe it fails NCORP. Girth Summit  (blether) 13:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Girth Summit  (blether)  13:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Girth Summit  (blether)  13:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Tentative oppose as I've seen very similar, short company stub articles for banks and credit unions that haven't been deleted. I say leave it and prioritize for improvement. Also opposed as no rationale provided in the proposal. Doug Mehus (talk) 17:51, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. It is not about the size. It is is about notability. In this case, it has to do with WP:CORPDEPTH, and WP:NCORP. — usernamekiran (talk)  23:04, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed - sorry if the shorthand is a little opaque - what it means is that the sourcing in this article does not meet the requirements outlined at WP:CORPDEPTH, and I was not able to find any sourcing about the company that does meet the criteria. I believe the article should be deleted because I fear this is a non-notable according to our notability guideline for companies and organisations. Girth Summit  (blether)  23:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: Savita Oil Technologies is India's one of the largest manufacturers of petroleum specialties, founded in 1961. The company has been listed on Nation Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange since 1994 and has earned an ISO certification.AdiyaanSK89 (talk) 12:25, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * comment: AdiyaanSK89 is creator of the article, with a very few edits outside the topic. — usernamekiran (talk)   22:13, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have removed the promotional content and company's profile that was cited as a reference from the article. I believe that the topic meets the notability requirements (WP:GNG) as the company has been covered in various leading publications such as DNA, India Today, Fortune 500.AdiyaanSK89 (talk) 12:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * AdiyaanSK89 As a company, it needs to meet NCORP rather than GNG, and that requires sourcing as described at CORPDEPTH. I haven't seen sourcing of that quality, but maybe I've missed something - would you be willing to point out anything that you've found? If there is quality sourcing out there I'd be willing to withdraw the nomination. Thanks Girth Summit  (blether)  11:19, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * delete: AfD's related to companies is not my area, so I took a few days. First of all, the subject fails general notability criteria, as it lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. Press releases, or brief mentions, or brief coverage caused by something else is not notability. The subject fails NCORP, and CORPDEPTH. Regarding listings in stock exchange(s), it doesn't establish notability. — usernamekiran (talk)  22:27, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * striking my vote above. Not my field after-all. Better abstaining than making a wrong decision. — usernamekiran (talk)  20:17, 2 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Usually, if a company has been floated on a sizable stock exchange, there will be analysts covering the company and ss per NCORP guidelines, analyst reports are explicitly stated to meet the criteria for establishing notability. Firstcall Research published this report in 2016. FRR Shares issued this report in 2011. Easy to find once you know what to look for., perhaps you should consider withdrawing the nomination.  HighKing++ 19:26, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Withdraw per HighKing's sources, which upon inspection appear to satisfy NCORP. Thanks for this Highking, those were good finds - just for future reference, could you let me know how you discovered them? Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  06:57, 3 September 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.