Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rautaruukki

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. ✗plicit 00:09, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rautaruukki (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable construction company. BEFORE turns up nothing but routine business news, press releases, and non-responsive articles (string: rautaruukki) and the article itself is solely cited to the company website. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 08:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Rautaruukki is a large, well-established publicly-listed company, I would be very surprised indeed if there wasn't plenty of RS coverage of it. It may be that the sources are mostly in Finnish, and may be found better under its trading name Ruukki; either way, I'm happy to have a looksee. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS: Google News search returns 5,200 hits, mostly but not only in Finnish. Books search also brings a large number of results, of which a good proportion are in English. The Finnish wiki article seems pretty well sourced, even if the English one isn't. Whether any single source provides sigcov, I don't yet know, but collectively they should at least establish notability. One thing, though: the company was apparently acquired by the Swedish SSAB a few years ago, so the article clearly needs updating, including changing much of it to past tense. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I did also attempt "ruukki", but I got a lot of non-responsive articles about unrelated entities. That said, I stuck with en.Google search as opposed to fi.Google. If the article is updated with these good sources, I'll happily withdraw the AfD. My point with AfDs like this is to light a fire under asses to get articles improved if it's possible as opposed to deleting them outright. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 11:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Jéské Couriano: Check out WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP: "Consider that Wikipedia is a work in progress and articles should not be deleted as punishment because no one has felt like cleaning them up yet." North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:14, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • A work in progress, yes, but if an article has had horrible, non-RS-compliant sourcing for almost a decade, how much longer do you have to wait for someone to fix it? Clearly nobody is going to address the rather serious sourcing issue without something more pressing than a maintenance tag. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 11:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Jéské Couriano: Well, you stated above that you found good sources, so have you considered improving the article yourself? Wikipedia encourages users to be bold, and if you believe an article needs improvement, you are allowed to improve it. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:39, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
            • I never made such a claim - DoubleGrazing did. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 17:33, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (but update). Rautaruukki or Ruukki was a state owned company in Finland, later a stock company. It is now part of SSAB as stated above. So the article could either be updated to a past sense or to be partly combined with SSAB article. The company is/was wiki-notable and as there are a lot of historical companies on Wikipedia I do not see a reason why this could not be kept here too. Jjanhone (talk) 08:08, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I was notified about this discussion by a bot. As far as I know, the originator has not been notified nor the other editors of the article. Jjanhone (talk) 12:32, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And this article exists on 12 languages according to Wikidata. Jjanhone (talk) 15:14, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Here is another source from 2017 published by Yle, which states that "Afarak Group, formerly known as Ruukki Group, is listed on the Helsinki and London stock exchanges" and that it is a mining company. This seems likely to be about the company, although I could be incorrect. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per above sources presented. It passes WP:GNG. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 13:24, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Sources exist and can be added, and article also needs updating. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There are sufficient references that contain in-depth information and independent content, for example the Finnish Trade Review as well as analyst commentary. Topic meets NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:23, 9 June 2021 (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.