Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flanco

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:33, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Flanco

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. WP:NOTYELLOWPAGES. While the Romanian wiki article is a bit longer and has references, from what I can gather with Google Translate is that they are not in-depth coverage - just the rewritten press releases, like "Flamingo opens three Flanco stores" or "Flanco wants to employ over 150 people this year". If you think any references are in-depth and reliable, please provide a more detailed analysis. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:24, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are many articles found in a search - [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9], and many many more, covering all aspects of the company, including history, finance, stores, etc. It appears to be a significant electronics and appliance retail chain in Romania, and should satisfy WP:GNG. Hzh (talk) 01:07, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Google hits are not sufficient. Can you provide an analysis of those sources, showing that they are independent and in-depth, and not mentions in passing and reprinted press releases? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:29, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note that you are the one who should read and analyze the sources if you want to nominate articles for deletion. You should be prepared to do the work per WP:BEFORE which would have reveal these sources and more before you nominated. You might get lucky and someone might come along and do the work for you, but you should not expect it as a matter of course. I've read the sources, and I considered them passing the criteria for sources, and you should read them first too. Hzh (talk) 11:08, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:07, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:14, 14 June 2019 (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.