Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ego Pharmaceuticals (2nd nomination)

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 delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:59, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ego Pharmaceuticals

[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)

Promotional article about non-notable company, by ovious company representative The content is a list of brands and thhe customary cute opening story about how they got started. The justification in the previous AfDin 2007 for reasons expanded on the article talk page as : <tq> The uniqueness of Ego in the pharmaceutical industry being Australian owned and Australian made for more than 5 decades (one of only about 5 companies) The single focus of Ego on being the specialist in dermatology only. The staff of Ego living the company values which are embedded throughout The reputation of Ego throughout pharmacy across Australia. Ask your pharmacist in Australia or New Zealand about Ego. .</tq> with the note<tq>NB The author has knowledge of details of Ego and vouches for the accuracy of this data.</tq> DGG ( talk ) 06:57, 27 March 2022 (UTC) DGG ( talk ) 13:56, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:58, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very promotional article, might have to dig a bit to find sources. One company history form a newspaper in 1987 [1]. Might possibly find others. Oaktree b (talk) 15:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant coverage. Awarded for exporter of the year, but reading up on that, appears not to be "significant award" as required in
WP:CORPDEPTH. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 09:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Weak delete. I was surprised I couldn't find more RS on the company-- certainly their products are in every pharmacy (and most bathroom cabinets) I've ever been in. I couldn't find much via Google or Newsbank unfortunately. I'm mindful that a lack of sources is not a reason to delete-- it's a reason to improve the article. I'd like to see the page stay, but I couldn't easily find RS to help. Cabrils (talk) 02:00, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company/organization therefore NCORP guidelines apply.
HighKing⁺⁺ 20:42, 30 March 2022 (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.