Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macedonian Thrace Brewery

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. The sources are all Greek to me, but they're sufficient to keep this article. (non-admin closure) --Puddleglum ^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 18:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonian Thrace Brewery

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

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

non-notable &in large part promotional -- a list of products and a list of social media links, cited mainly to its own web site. DGG ( talk ) 03:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DGG Hello and thank you for your time.First,there is an article in Greek Wikipedia for this company and I thought it would be useful to non Greek speaking people to create one in English. I considered the reasons you refer above and I will proceed to some edits.I believe is a notable article as other big breweries in Greece have Wikipedia articles and as this company is the third or fourth biggest brewing company and holds around 5 to 7% of the market in Greece.It is also a notable exporter to many countries around the globe.I will replace where possible all reference links citing to its own website with ones from newspapers and third party websites and I'll remove the parts that cannot be verified. Gnslps (talk)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have argued at various times that our inclusion of companies should be based primarily upon their real world importance, rathe than on sourcing. This has never been accepted, except in limited ways, and as secondary factors. We do take into consideration membership in major exchange (such as the companies whose stock price are components of the S&P500), and we informally sometimes consider the size of the company, and very occasionally the market share. We tend to give a preference for long established companies, and are very skeptical about articles on ones in the process of formation, or that have never actually produced a project. There are no formal standards for these factors. Personally, I have sometimes argued for acceptance of the company holding the predominant market share in a country, but even I have never argued it for 3rd or 4th. DGG ( talk ) 23:53, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:28, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine it would be even harder for companies where most of the sources would not be in English. I was going to vote on this, but I think I could fairly due to not speaking Greek. Although, interestingly most of the sources in the article are in English. So, maybe I will anyway. More on topic, I think there was something in a guideline about having slightly loser standards for smaller "local" companies. Maybe the same can go for companies in places like "minor" (no insult) European countries. Where they have a large market in that place, but a small market compared to what it would be in a larger country. For instance there shouldn't be the same standard for a company in a place like Malta with a population of just under five hundred thousand compared to one in a larger place. Especially if they have a large market share there. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DGG It's not a realistic argument whether a company is notable or not if it is a member of the S&P500.Even for the market of big countries like US is insane. Also,you have to consider some facts to understand the situation in the Greek market of beer.Until recently,a subsidiary of Heineken,Athenian Brewery, was holding more than 70% of the market share for 30 years,but it managed to achieve this percentage due to its unfair competition methods adopted, for which was found guilty and fined 30 million euros by a greek court.So, the remaining percentage has to be shared to many micro and mid-sized breweries.That's why I believe the market share matters in this case.I can give many proof of why this company is notable for the size of Greece, such as the fact that it managed to fulfill its needs for raw materials(malt) 100% by the local production,become the main supplier of them to the inland market micro and mid-sized breweries and start exporting it while of course being exporting the main products,the beers,since 1999.It has farming contracts with hundreds of producers of northern Greece and also managed to found a subsidiary company and all of these through the debt crisis Greece was suffering.One Last thing, in wikipedia there are articles for way much smaller breweries that have no special impact to the society they're located due to their small production rates. Some of them are: Peiraiki Microbrewery,Rethymnian Brewery,Santorini Brewing Company Adamant1 I agree with you! Excuse me for any mistakes Gnslps (talk) 03:39, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

to be sure ,being a member of the S&P 500 is not necessary--I gave it merely as an example of where we accepted real-world importance. I personally am prepared to accept being the leading company in an industry i nany country as large and significant as Greece. r. aasa reason for notable , and had it been he largest brewer in Greece, I would argue for its acceptance. But thatmeans largest, not 3rd lrgest. DGG ( talk ) 09:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DGGAccording to your logic if you're not the largest in something, you don't deserve to have a WP article.For example,in the soccer,i suppose you believe that only the biggest teams deserve a WP article and not those which rank lower, even if they belong to a whole such as the league and so on.In our case this whole is the brewing industry in Greece (See also Beer in Greece). So,according to this I'm expecting from you to nominate for deletion every small brewery and in large scale every small company based in any country that is listed in the English Wikipedia so you can be unbiased. Gnslps (talk) 11:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think you understand. The basic requirement is that the company meet [[the referencing standards at WP:NCORP. For companies, large or small, that are marginal in that respect, we can consider other factors. However, there are many hundred thousand articles in WP accepted in earlier years when the standards were lower that we need to either upgrade or remove. The least we can do is not add to them. DGG ( talk ) 17:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 21:42, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The only significant coverage I found in independent sources was related to a lawsuit against Heineken.

Greek City Times - moderate coverage of the lawsuit

Stibbe - good coverage of a ruling of the District of Amsterdam not to find jurisdiction over the case

Yahoo Life - some coverage in a public interest story

Reuters - brief mention by Reuters

We could argue about whether this confers notability for the lawsuit, but that is not the subject here; the subject here is the brewery itself, which does not appear to meet notability guidelines per WP:NCORP or even WP:GNG. Therefore, delete. Ikjbagl (talk) 23:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The Greek version of this page should also be considered for deletion, unless there are Greek-language sources that make the subject notable (in which case I would change my vote here to KEEP, since notability doesn't depend on language). Maybe someone like Cplakidas or Encyclopædius/Dr._Blofeld from the Greek translation wikiproject can help. I'll also post this on the Wikiproject Greece page. Ikjbagl (talk) 00:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC) It turns out this was the case; see below for my updated vote. Ikjbagl (talk) 23:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree on removing some of the mention of awards etc but it looks notable enough in its industry in that part of the world. Companies don't need to be globally prominent to be worthy of articles on here. The transwiki project isn't active btw even though it should be.. † Encyclopædius 05:39, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is significant coverage also in Greek publications proving that is a notable company in Greece, in its industry and the community (there are citations in the Greek Wikipedia). P.S. in a quick search I found this article and I don't think that a non notable company would get visited by a European Commission member. Gnslps (talk) 09:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I originally voted delete on this, but after finding significant coverage in some Greek language sources, I think the subject is notable. Specifically these pages, which I have added to the end of the first sentence of the article:

(As far as Google translate tells me,) these sources seem to me to be independent and reliable, and they have significant coverage of the subject, so I vote keep. Ikjbagl (talk) 23:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per the above provided Greek sources by user Ikjbagl (and others similarly covering the subject that can be found, too). ǁǁǁ ǁ Chalk19 (talk) 06:29, 4 May 2020 (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.