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 keep. j⚛e decker^talk 17:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:ORGSIG - Cwobeel (talk) 16:03, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The article version date April 4th (prior to it being re-written and then blanked to its current state) had two reliable third-party sources, and a simple Google news search turned up dozens more. The subject is clearly notable, although is merely a stub in its current state. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:17, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find any sources, most if not all of the Google search results are for stock quotes or press releases. - Cwobeel (talk) 17:13, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I Google for "Arthur J. Gallagher", and select a news search, the results are primarily related to various acquisitions. Some of these are clearly published press releases, but there are several which appear to be original articles by the publishers. Granted, many of these still miss the in-depth coverage part ... but there are still enough with adequate coverage to meet the threshold of notability. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:46, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note, I've added several external links to the article, some of which provide better coverage than others. I have no arguments with moving these from the external links section over to the talk page; I just wanted to flag some potential sources that someone can use for expanding the article. I don't have time to do so myself right now, but may see if I can assist in expanding it later this month. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Barek. This is a well-known company in the insurance industry with a long history. Some additional examples of coverage: [1][2][3][4] --Arxiloxos (talk) 18:25, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep now that the promotionalism has been removed. What needs to be added is the basic financial data that shows it is a NYSE company with over $ 1 billion revenue. For such information Yahoo finance is a reliable source. A simple rule that any NYSE company is notable would solve many problems, including the need to quibble about what sources are substantial. DGG ( talk ) 20:01, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as promotional content's been removed, Just needs expanding more which can be fixed anytime. –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above comments and WP:LISTED. VMS Mosaic (talk) 01:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• I can confirm (from the UK) that the company is widely known outside the USA, and has made several notable contributions to its industry. Their UK operation has won a number of awards for the quality of their services, and insurance industry professionals would certainly consider the firm notable. Keep, obviously. RomanSpa (talk) 07:49, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the news search proposed by Barek brings back many relevant hits specifically talking about the business. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:42, 23 June 2014 (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.