Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maliban
http://businesstoday.lk/article.php?article=6639 is in-depth, but really, it reads like a press-release or company's own history write up (and is businesstoday.lk a reliable source?). Ditto for http://www.sundaytimes.lk/110605/Fh/fh01.html, the publisher seems possibly notable (The Sunday Times (Sri Lanka)), but that's not the same as reliable, and the quality of the tiny paragraph speaks for itself. Both articles are highly promotional: "Maliban, Sri Lanka's premier biscuit manufacturing company, celebrates 50 years of quality, taste and successful commercial operations this year, thus marking another milestone in the company's rich legacy." is the opening of the first, or the ending of the second "this philosophy of using the best quality raw materials and ingredients in the manufacture of Maliban products has been practised unchanged". Actually, the second source is clearly attributed to "This is a statement made by the present CEO Mr D Lakshman Weerasuriya." so it is pretty much a press release (the first source is unattributed, and I'd be surprised if it wasn't written by the company's PR dept, too - the last paragraph ends with attribution of a quote to "U Keerthie Adasuriya, CEO of Maliban"; at the very list it is a very poor excuse for journalism).  is an issue, but it doesn't absolve content from requiring RS and so on. Standards are the same for all companies. The company got the "National Quality Award" but is the award notable? Sadly, I am leaning delete here, as I am not convinced  is met. The closer should consider the strength of arguments - a lot of them are sadly , ,  (that one specifically discusses systemic bias fallacy in notability arguments) and so on
— User:Piotrus, 05:28, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SYSTEMICBIAS||WP:NORG||WP:ITSIMPORTANT||WP:ITSNOTABLE||WP:LOCALFAME (Wikipedia:Systemic bias)