Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Relacom

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relacom[edit]

[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)

There is no sourcing for this article and I was unable to find additional sources upon searching. Additionally all of the users who substantially contributed are now blocked so I was unable to find anyone to discuss the merits of this article with. Libs4Libraries (talk) 15:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My preference would be to not delete just yet - but however, I strongly agree, it is way, way short on references and badly needs more. GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 November 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Internet, Europe, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If the contributors are all blocked, doesn't that make the article eligible for CSD G5? Fermiboson (talk) 14:48, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There's coverage in Finnish newspapers about Relacom Finland, but it's just your basic announcement type things without any independent analysis:

Starts co-determination talks prior to lay-offs [1]
Doesn't intend to lay off people [2]
Employees walk out [3]
Lays off 100 people [4]
Lays off another 365 people [5]
Lays off 430 [6]
Goes bankcrupt [7]

Reliable sources, certainly, but the articles have all the hallmarks of simply regurgitating a press release. I'm not seeing any coverage about the parent company in Finnish. Swedish papers might have better coverage, but hypothetical coverage does not count. As such, I'll go with "delete" unless someone can actually identify good WP:CORPDEPTH sources. -Ljleppan (talk) 09:10, 5 November 2023 (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.