Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Íshúsfélag Ísfirðinga

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 speedy keep. While not actually withdrawing the nominator has now said "this certainly passes GNG easily." So WP:SK would seem to apply. (non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Íshúsfélag Ísfirðinga

(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. Originally PRODed by other user. De PRODed by new user who is only deproding articles without any improvement/explanation. —usernamekiran(talk) 11:05, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:29, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iceland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:30, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:30, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Well, notability depends not on sources in the article but what is out there. Being Iceland's oldest freezery, over a century old, could certainly be notable. Apart from the cited source (which is a substantial article on the firm's centenary), there is a period photo here, a history book (Courage, J. 1992) entirely about the company, and notices about the company as you'd expect on the Nordic Exchange. I found details of the firm's football team here. All that's just on the first 2 pages of a search, which would be easier for an Icelandic speaker. This looks to me like a notable company. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap: this certainly passes GNG easily. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:05, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. I guess you'll be withdrawing this from AfD, then. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:28, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - thanks to work by Aymatth2 this is clearly notable, by GNG if nothing else. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:32, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep More poor editorial judgements in nominating this.., good job Aymatth.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:38, 1 June 2017 (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.