Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Volue

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. (non-admin closure) Dr. Universe (talk) 20:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Volue

[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)

Advertisement of a non notable company recently deleted. Suspected WP:COI, Fails WP:GNG GermanKity (talk) 08:57, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 08:57, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 08:57, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 08:57, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GermanKity: Can you clarify which parts of the article are not written from the neutral point of view? I've tried to include only cold facts based on independent sources, which were provided as references. In my opinion subject of the article is notable. Green energy transition is on the spotlight now in Europe and Volue company has been recognized by European Commission and Norwegian Government. Volue is listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange and I've seen many articles based only on this reason. Bartex9 (talk) 09:19, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And speaking about beeing non notable. References to Volue can be found on many media platforms: Finansavisen (the Norwegian Financial Times), Montel or Adressa. Some of them are linked in the article. Bartex9 (talk) 21:05, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article might have COI, but it doesn't read as a blatant advertisement imo. And sourcing is not great, but okay: Adresseavisen for example seems to have a longer news on them which sadly is behind a paywall. Others are reliable too, even though coverage isn't extensive in all. I'll assume good faith on the inaccessible sources and say that this should be kept, even though the maintenance tag should stick around. --LordPeterII (talk) 23:16, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:19, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's also this article, for example, (reasonably long, in the newspaper on 17 October 2020, page 21). Agree with LordPeterII above. /Julle (talk) 10:49, 22 July 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.