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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:03, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pharmazz (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)

No single sources meets NCORP; routine not reliable and deep media sources; not notable company by its own Taking off shortly (talk) 09:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, India, United Kingdom, and Illinois. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:56, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I found [1] and [2], Which are significant references from reliable resources. This company meets WP:NCORP. I can also see the page is reviewed by Klbrain and he stated on creator's talk page "Thanks for creating this page for a company, which has independent coverage focussing on the company which has drugs in clinical use." Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm surprised to see the above keep vote seriously considering this link as meeting WP:NCORP: [3]. Let's analyze this source:

Fails to Establish Significant Coverage

• The article is primarily an announcement about a licensing agreement between **Dr. Reddy’s** and **Pharmazz** regarding the distribution of Centhaquine in India.
• There is **no in-depth analysis** or **independent investigative reporting** about Pharmazz as a company.

Lack of Independent and Substantial Coverage

• The article **relies on company statements** and does not offer a third-party evaluation of Pharmazz’s impact, financial standing, or industry significance.
• The primary quotes come from **company executives** (Dr. Reddy’s and Pharmazz), suggesting that the content is largely derived from **press releases** rather than independent reporting.

Focuses on a Product, Not the Company’s Notability

• The coverage is about the **drug Centhaquine**, not Pharmazz as a notable entity.
• WP:NCORP requires **substantial coverage of the company itself**, not just its product deals.

This source is a **routine business announcement** and does **not** provide the depth of coverage required to establish notability under WP:NCORP. 71.167.18.238 (talk) 16:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Considering to close as no consensus, given the lack of participation. But another relist wouldn't hurt.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 12:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Most of the sources are either routine announcements (i.e. churnalism) or are discussing the company's products, not the company. Ref. 1 in the article might possibly just clear the bar, but I don't know about the source's reliability. Altogether very weak sourcing. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:26, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It's worth pointing out WP:SIRS review of the sources is somewhat weak. Very little in terms of independent sourcing and the main thing is that it lacks the widespread coverage from such sources that would factor in notability.  GuardianH  16:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per IP editor's analysis above. Agree with the other editors that the sourcing seems too weak to meet WP:NCORP. Madeleine (talk) 21:08, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Lacks Significant CoverageRahmatula786 (talk) 06:08, 28 February 2025 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete. Per nom fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2025 (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.