Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BrandSafway
Notability for companies is based entirely on substantial coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources - not on size, turnover or number of employees. Of the 7 sources in the article as of writing this comment: two are the websites of the company or parents/subsidiaries, the Nasdaq one is simply a |syndicated version of the Reuters article (and so in fact the inclusion of it gives a distinct impression of deliberate padding to make the sources appear better than they are), and one is a business directory website. None of those are suitable sources and all should simply be removed. That leaves the original Reuters piece, which is a run-of-the-mill business announcement and offers almost no |depth. Finally, the two BIC pieces: one is an interview, therefore not independent, so does little to establish notability. The other is a very brief announcement with little depth. Both would, I think, deserve inclusion alongside better sources but on their own they clearly do not offer ‘substantial coverage’ in ‘multiple’ sources
— User:Hugsyrup, 08:55, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SYNDICATED||WP:CORPDEPTH (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)