Talk:MKS Instruments

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 17 April 2021 by reviewer DGG (talk · contribs).

from the discussion on accepting the draft: DGG ( talk ) 07:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Which references in the draft meet WP:ORGCRIT specifically? CNMall41 (talk) 19:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citation 1 and 5. A proper due dilligence is required. -Hatchens (talk) 03:24, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is required and also performed if you read my commentary previously provided. The first example you give is not independent. It is someone from the company providing commentary. The second is a perfect example of what ORGCRIT describes as routine coverage of "the expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business," which does not satisfy the requirement.CNMall41 (talk) 05:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Billion, DGG. Feel free delete/strike my comment. Loksmythe (talk) 00:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the correction.I had meant to type billion. For a $6 million firm my comment would have made little sense, because at that size, they're almost never covered. Depending on industry, the likely dividing range is somewhere between $100 million-$400 million for companies that actually make or do something; financial companies, at least 10 times higher in assents under management. DGG ( talk ) 06:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC) .[reply]

@DGG:, @Loksmythe: - I thought the same so I did some digging for the submitter. Unfortunately, I cannot find enough to push it over the top. Likely because of their industry they are going to fly under the radar. After all, no one wants to read about vacuum pumps and the New York Times is unlikely to do a feature story about it. This would be one of the few (and I mean VERY few) times when an inclusion policy for larger companies would come into play. Unfortunately, we don't have one. CNMall41 (talk) 02:19, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41, I think there's definitely enough coverage out there, especially in archives. I'm seeing hits in top publications like WSJ [1], Bloomberg [2], Reuters [3] without going in too deeply. But someone still has to put in the work, which the submitter did not. Loksmythe (talk) 14:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitted. $10 billion publicly traded 60 year old company with 5,400 employees, plenty of news coverage including of its major acquisitions. FloridaArmy (talk) 01:08, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]