Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spigen

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!} 22:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spigen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing in the entry or my WP:BEFORE suggests this company meets WP:NCOMPANY. Some of their products get an occasional review, but the company does not attract significant coverage. PS. It is WP:LISTED (KOSDAQ). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:28, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, South Korea, and California. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:28, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I wrote the article so I'm not going to vote either way because I can't really remember why I felt it notable 5 years ago but I did do some brief browsing and found some reputable seeming in-depth translated news pieces about them, I'll let someone else decide. Forbes Korea, Pulse, a bland bit of real estate journal. korea probably has more but alas, I don't read Korean. EoRdE6^(Talk) 03:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:15, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:47, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:42, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Agree with nom, some of the products have reviews but there are no sources that meet the criteria for establishing the notability of the company. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:46, 28 December 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.