In what way is a LISTED company not notable? Paul Beardsell (talk) 13:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
- Have had listed indian companies declared non-notable and deleted in AfDs because they, as a frequent delete voter in business related afds puts it, haven't had significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education, and as such this non-consumer tech business is not really an encyclopedia subject.. See the AfD listed above, thats fairly typical for what happens to an indian listed company (pr shills puff up the article, and the article gets branded as non-notable puffery and off it goes, unles someone like me manages to grind out a no-consensus decision)--Sodabottle (talk) 14:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
- Well, if I say I want to keep an article because another similar article has been kept I am (rightly) told that I cannot rely on the precedent. Similarly, therefore, if you want to remove an article you cannot point at other similar articles which have been removed. I know *nothing* about this company, it is so notable that I have never heard of it. If, however, I were an investor on the Indian Stock Exchange I would be surprised to think that a listed company was not notable. Typically for a company to be listed it has to have a market capitalisation of at least a certain size, there need to be a minimum number of shareholders (it must not be "closely held"). In what way can a listed company not satisfy some of the "significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education" criteria. It must have an economic impact, at least. This one also provides education services. Paul Beardsell (talk) 15:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
- I think it should be generally accepted at WP that all listed companies (on any reasonable stock exchange) are likely to be notable. Paul Beardsell (talk) 15:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
