Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hiku Brands

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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hiku Brands

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

I removed the advertising, but am i doubt about notability. Thesources dont seem sufficient for WP:NCORP DGG ( talk ) 00:39, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I created this article as an employee of Hiku Brands. I am very sorry for not following Wikipedia policies. I simply didn’t know it is that complicated. I clearly stated my conflict of interest several days ago. Hiku Brands is a notable company with the significant coverage at the Canadian media. I’ve added editing suggestions at the Talk page (as requested by the Conflict of interest policy). It has many links to trusted sources. Again, I am very sorry for the confusion. -- Tokyosmokio (talk) 14:40, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:58, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:58, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:28, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:29, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Alterations made (just) after AfDed I feel move it out of the delete category. Only 2 weeks ago it was suitable for speedy and was improved out of that category. While primary editor has COI, it is now declared and the edit suggested and partially implemented has sufficiently improved it re. notability. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:01, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I put a speedy on this when it was first made, but it's looking in better shape now. The main contributor has clearly stated their COI, the sources look okay to me, and it seems notable to me. StewdioMACK (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've looked at each reference with an eye on whether the reference meets the criteria for establishing notability. Sadly, not one of the references meets the criteria. WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND are easy to understand - we are looking for a reference that provides in-depth information on the company using intellectually independent content. This globeandmail reference is a mention-in-passing simple stating that Hiku has been added to Canada's largest cannabis-related exchange-traded fund (fails WP:CORPDEPTH). Thie Bloomberg reference relies on a statement from DOJA's CEO (fails WP:ORGIND). This canada.ca reference is a list of authorized licensed producers (fails WP:CORPDEPTH). This thestar.com reference is a mention in passing (fails WP:CORPDEPTH). This straight.com reference relies on quotations/interview with Trent Kitsch, president of Hiku, for Hiku-related information (fails WP:ORGIND). The ft.com reference is a simple list of share price (fails WP:CORPDEPTH). This newcannabisventures.com reference is a press release (fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND). This ctvnews.ca reference and This theglobeandmail.com reference this thegloveandmail reference are both exactly the same and are both mentions-in-passing related to the merger and based on a company announcement (fails WP:ORGIND). Similarly, this ctvnews.ca reference has no named journalist as author and is a mention-in-passing (fails WP:CORPDEPTH). This westmanjournal.com reference is a mention-in-passing (fails WP:CORPDEPTH). Thie cbc.ca reference is a mention-in-passing (fails WP:CORPDEPTH). This newswire reference is a press release (fails WP:ORGIND). Thie straight.com reference is based on a company announcement (fails WP:ORGIND). This financialpost.com reference is based on a Hiku press release (fails WP:ORGIND). Based on the above analysis of sources and my own searching, I cannot find any intellectually independent references and as such this topic fails GNG and WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:10, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:35, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: does not meet WP:NCORP / WP:CORPDETH. Just a private company going about its business. Wikipedia is not a free means of promotion or an extension of a corporate web site. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Seems notable to me after reviewing these sources:

http://business.financialpost.com/business/hiku-merges-with-weedmd-in-240-million-cannabis-deal-focused-on-seniors-and-retail

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/4-20-from-protesting-cannabis-prohibition-to-celebrating-legalization-1.4627743

http://business.financialpost.com/news/retail-marketing/tokyo-smoke-goes-public-as-cannabis-companies-eye-retail

https://www.straight.com/cannabis/1056971/hiku-calls-sales-licence-acquisition-crowning-milestone

- Mar11 (talk) 05:10, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given we have new sources to consider a further relist is justified
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:10, 6 May 2018 (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.