Deletion of FEXCO

Comment: To my read,  is met. While (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=FEXCO&oldid=923565774 at time of nom) there are only two sources in the article (and the article does need work, per the longstanding tags), the subject has been the primary topic in extensive coverage over the years in the two Irish newspaper of record|newspapers of record. Namely the https://www.irishtimes.com/topics/topics-7.1213540?article=true&tag_company=Fexco Irish Times and https://www.independent.ie/search/?search=fexco&sort=score Irish Independent. In the latter for example there is coverage, across two decades, which includes examples of https://www.independent.ie/business/us-tourism-row-over-fexco-role-26258461.html unfavourable coverage (1999), https://www.independent.ie/business/central-bank-warns-fexco-to-slow-down-26126620.html regulatory oversight (2000), https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/the-moneychanger-26435294.html "explanatory" coverage (2008), through to https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/fexco-grows-share-of-london-fx-market-with-10m-swoop-37220372.html acquisition coverage (2018) and https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/fexco-scooped-23m-after-stock-exchange-sale-38602528.html recent events (2019). There is similar levels of coverage in the Irish Times, as well as examples in the https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/interglobe-lands-fexco-stake-in-aviation-lessor-airborne-fkdglbj3b The Times (London), https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/fexco-eyes-more-deals-880980.html Irish Examiner, https://www.ft.com/content/4b70f144-f4ac-11e8-ae55-df4bf40f9d0d Financial Times, etc. Are there limited relevant links/refs in the article? Absolutely! Are there limited relevant links/coverage in the universe? Nope. (Does the article warrant improvement? Yes! Does the article warrant deleting? No! Not on CORPDEPTH/SIGCOV grounds at any rate. Not in my view
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: The article does not make a claim of importance or significance for the subject. 2 of the sources are routine business announcements that do not satisfy ; 2 are primary. Looking on the Web I find loads more routine business announcements in reliable sources but that also do not satisfy . Does not pass  or 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:GNG||WP:NCORP)

Comment: I've cleaned up the article and added some more references. I am satisfied that there are sufficient references to meet the requirements for establishing notability, topic passes GNG and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP)