Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PharmEasy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As per WP:NCORP there should be multiple independent sources of deep coverage with in-depth information on the company. I was not able to find any such references. Alphaonekannan (talk) 05:56, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Alphaonekannan (talk) 05:56, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep significant coverage in independent sources. Likely to be a listed entity [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:51, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:14, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: As per above, and it seems that company is one of the largest player in Online Pharmacy in India[7] and perhaps has gone public too, therefore, a case for strong keep emerges. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User4edits (talk • contribs)
Comment: WP:LISTED listed states that Consensus has been that notability is not automatic for listed companies. However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage and analyst reports. I was not able to find any evidence to prove that this is a listed company. Company is one of the largest player in Online Pharmacy in India. How does this make it notable. You are arguing that notability is inherited. Companies must meet WP:SIRS to establish notability as notability is not independent. Alphaonekannan (talk) 04:35, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]