Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rephco Pharmaceuticals
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. SarahStierch (talk) 21:23, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Rephco Pharmaceuticals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Appears to fail WP:CORP. I couldn't turn up any reliable third-party information on this company, at all, but my searching skills have been lacking recently. Apparently this article was declined at AfC so the article creator decided to go ahead and move it to mainspace anyways. TKK bark ! 21:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I also could find no evidence of substantial coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. All I could find are directory listings, and promotional material and press releases from the company itself.. Does not meet any of our notability guidelines. Nothing worth saving or merging. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 21:39, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete It appears to be self promotion. --Stormbay (talk) 22:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Non-notable. I failed to find any sources. If it does exist it is very small, IRWolfie- (talk) 23:31, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There is not enough proof of notability, and the article has too few sources. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 20:38, 18 June 2013 (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.