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.
@
Lavalizard101: I have to disagree on that point. Despite the authors' behaviour, the page was never hopelessly irreparable as the WP:TNT essay reffers to. When it was proposed for deletation
[7] it was an undersourced stub that had four statements which all where factually correct, that is what kind of company this is, location, when it was established and by who. As a firm believer in that
Wikipedia:Deletion is not cleanup, I did a short search for the company in the Icelandic media and found ample coverage and improved the sourcing and added a few other statements. As it stands, the subject of the article passes the general notability guideline and the article's past problems where easily fixable with search for sources per
WP:BEFORE and minor style cleanup.
Alvaldi (
talk)
07:22, 25 September 2021 (UTC)reply
User:Donjohnsosn5 after this comment then edited some more articles so the above comment is no longer true in the sense that they no longer appear to be an SPA (but that could be bc they are trying to not look like an SPA).
Lavalizard101 (
talk)
21:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Weak keep. There are lots of foreign language references cited in the article. In such cases, the burden of proving that an article fails NCORP/GNG requires a detailed source analysis by the nominator (or other delete voters). In the absence of a convincing source analysis, I'm not seeing a convincing argument for deletion. Likewise, the article does not have any glaring issues that make a TNT warranted.
4meter4 (
talk)
21:45, 30 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Weak Keep Since this is about a company/organization, then we look to
WP:NCORP as the appropriate
Guideline (as per GNG) and not vanilla GNG. The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with
in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing
"Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject.
There appears to be sufficient references that meet NCORP criteria, for example the Timarit.is reference and the vb.is reference. Topic meets NCORP.
HighKing++ 19:16, 2 October 2021 (UTC)reply
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.