Project:Vendor notability

When a supplier warrants an article.

A supplier organisation warrants a PeptidePedia Wiki article when there is enough verifiable, independent material about it to write a neutral article of reasonable length. This guideline sets out how that is judged, because supplier articles attract more deletion and promotion pressure than any other class of page on the wiki.

An organisation is presumed notable for this wiki's purposes if it meets at least three of the following:

1. a verifiable legal identity — a registered company name and jurisdiction that can be checked against a registry;
2. a documented operating history of two years or more;
3. a body of independent third-party test reports on its material, from at least one of Janoshik Analytical, Medutest, PeptideMeter or VendorInvestigate;
4. substantive coverage in a source independent of the organisation;
5. a product range and documentation practice that can be described from primary documents.

Meeting the criteria is a presumption, not an entitlement. An article that cannot be written neutrally from available sources should not exist, whatever the organisation's size.

Volume of advertising. Length of a product list. Number of forum mentions. Self-published claims about capacity, staff numbers or certification, unless corroborated. A large number of positive community reports, on its own — those are self-selected and are evidence about reception, not about notability.

Where an organisation fails the criteria but is genuinely discussed in sources, a merge into a broader article is usually better than deletion. See Project:Deletion policy.

No prices. No offers, discounts or codes. One external link — a supplier's own domain, in External links, marked nofollow and sponsored; never in the body, and omitted where it is not. No contact details of any kind. No claim about shipping outcomes that is not attributed to a source.