Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bareezé

Add links
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 keep. I note that several references have been provided and these have been adequately debated by the AFD participants, who believe that they establish notability. I recognize not everyone shares that view, but there is a rough consensus to keep, and that is the standard. Stifle (talk) 09:36, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bareezé

[edit]

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

Bareezé (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The person who is founder of this company is notable maybe. But company is not having links that are good enough for WP:NCORP. Laptopinmyhands (talk) 14:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Disclosure: this page caught my attention because I was notified about it by an IP on my talk. Normally, I would've avoided it if the subject was non-notable. However, I will take the liberty to express myself and leave it to the closer to decide the merits. The subject is genuinely notable as a Pakistani clothing brand, with multinational outlets. There are several sources which list it as one of the "major" clothing brands and manufacturers in Pakistan, for example Profit by Pakistan Today, Express Tribune, Dawn, and others [2] [3]. Purely based on this, the subject ought to be kept. Mar4d (talk) 14:24, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Thanks for finding more references. Just FYI, this is a company/organization therefore NCORP guidelines apply. There are particular criteria for establishing the notability of a company. As per WP:SIRS *each* reference must meet the criteria for establishing notability - the quantity of coverage is irrelevant so long as we find a minimum of two. WP:NCORP requires 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. (This is usually the criteria where most references fail). References cannot rely only on information provided by the company, quotations, press releases, announcements, interviews fail ORGIND. Whatever is left over must also meet CORPDEPTH. With that in mind, lets look at the references you found:
  • This from Pakistan Today is a story about corporate lobbying and the topic company has a mere mention-in-passing as follows: "We have roughly 250 members, and all of the major manufacturers like Bareeze, Nishat, and Sapphire are members of this association..." The article therefore fails WP:CORPDEPTH.
  • This from The Express Tribune is a puff profile for the Alkhuddam Group of Companies with no attributed journalist. The same quote turns up at another page which attributed the article to the Times of India although this page is no longer available. A slightly longer version of the article with subtle differences and an earlier date also turns up here attributed to Sheikh Qayoom as the journalist. Notwithstanding all of that, the topic company gets a mere mention-in-passing with no in-depth information about the company, fails CORPDEPTH
  • This from Images is also a mere mention-in-passing with no in-depth information on the company
  • This in the Express Tribune is a puff profile with no attributed journalist and based entirely on a press release (says it at the start of the 2nd paragraph) and therefore fails ORGIND
None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability of the company, just mere-mentions or based on company PR. HighKing 12:33, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I have to go by what I actually see at the subject article. I saw at least TWO in-depth articles by The Express Tribune newspaper that say 'Bareeze' right in the article titles provided above by Mar4d and then go on to discuss this popular Pakistani clothing brand with multinational outlets. In addition, the article is supported by references by Forbes, The Spectator (UK magazine) and Dawn (newspaper). Ngrewal1 (talk) 18:09, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This article 'Bareeze' is about ONLY a clothing brand of a corporation. It's a short (stub) article and is NOT about a corporation. So WP:CORPDEPTH does not apply here. In my view, the notability of the clothing brand has already been shown. Ngrewal1 (talk) 18:25, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
how come brand is not a part of the corporation? Won’t company use the brand to sell their products? Even WP:GNG is not met here. Laptopinmyhands (talk) 01:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Right now Bareeez clothing brand's parent corporation Sefam (Pvt.) Limited does not have a Wikipedia article. There is no point in talking about something that does not exist...would be pure speculation. I suggest we deal with it when that article is created on Wikipedia. Ngrewal1 (talk) 15:22, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: counting that last comment as a delete vote
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 02:37, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Totally untrue statement about sources above. One needs to take a look and see that there are plenty of very reliable independent newspaper sources and international publications sources as well – not only given above by User:Mar4d but also at the article itself. Ngrewal1 (talk) 12:45, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please read our guidelines WP:NCORP - you might be surprised to find that mentions in "very reliable independent newspaper sources and international publications sources" is not one of the criteria - in fact, that's often assumed to be true before each individual reference is examined and each reference must meet NCORP including ORGIND and CORPDEPTH. For example, please post a link to one single reference which was provided above by Mar4d or within the article and identify within that article the paragraph which you believe contains in-depth information, clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated with the topic company, about the topic company. HighKing 13:39, 21 March 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bareezé&oldid=1078976799"