Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SAMCO Securities (2nd nomination)

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|SAMCO Securities}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=SAMCO Securities}})

The topic is a company therefore WP:NCORP is the applicable guideline. Most of the references are based on company announcements or basic financial reporting. I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails WP:NCORP. The topic was "soft deleted" as an editor said it was a "company brand wiki page. Please restore the page so that I can make edits to it" but all the only edit was to update the company logo. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: Presumably, the secondary sources cited in the article aren't giving it significant enough coverage, right? If so, then I'd agree with deletion. It also reads like it was written by the company right now (although of course that specific problem could be fixed). DesertPipeline (talk) 04:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
• Hi {{u|DesertPipeline}}, NCORP requires that references are *both* significant *and* contain "Independent Content". We don't regard references that rely on information provided by the company (or a source connected with the company) as good enough - "echo chamber" references do not establish notability. Whether the "echo chamber" reference is in a "secondary" source and "significant" doesn't matter if it doesn't contain "Independent Content". The references in the article all fail our criteria for establishing notability as follows:
• [https://www.thehindu.com/business/discount-broking-model/article7579494.ece This from The Hindu] is based on "a statement" from the company, fails WP:ORGIND
• [https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/samco-securities-sees-biz-turnover-of-rs-10-000cr-day-in-3yrs-116021800749_1.html This from Business Standard]] is based on a statement/PR from the company, fails WP:ORGIND.
• [https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/discount-brokerage-firm-samco-sets-eyes-on-gujarat-market-115070100788_1.html This from Business Standard] is based on PR and interview with the CEO, fails ORGIND.
• [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/SAMCO-launches-Indian-Trading-League/articleshow/47190358.cms This from Time of India] is entirely based on an announcement/PR from the company, fails ORGIND
• [https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=297978887 This Bloomberg link (broken)] is entirely based on information provided by the company, fails ORGIND
• [https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/markets/stock-markets/discount-broker-samco-forays-into-margin-funding/article8253649.ece This from The Hindu Business Line] is based on an announcement/PR from the company with an interview with the CEO, fails ORGIND
• [https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/markets/samco-securities-launches-giga-trading-app-stocknote/article23509429.ece Thie next from the Hindu Business Line] is entirely based on PR/announcement from the company, fails ORGIND
• [https://www.financialexpress.com/money/samco-securities-launches-automated-mutual-fund-rd-distribution-platform/1397234/ This from Financial Express] is based on company PR and quotations from Omkeshwar Singh who will be leading the new platform for Samco and quotations from the CEO, fails ORGIND.

::As you can see, the criteria failed by the above references was ORGIND first and foremost - that is, the content of those articles was not "independent" but relied entirely on information provided by the company or their officers. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:28, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

• :::Thank you for your detailed answer! DesertPipeline (talk) 02:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: Due to HighKing's response I definitely agree that this is the correct action here. DesertPipeline (talk) 02:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.