Talk:Lisle Corporation

Speedy deletion
Seriously? You can walk into any O'Reilly Auto Parts store or Sears and see a whole aisle of Lisle tools. That's what inspired me to create this article, actually. The company's been around a hundred freaking years and makes over 400 different automotive tools; they're at least as notable as Psyduck. I mean, Park Tool's article still stands (and rightfully so, they're one of the most significant makers of bicycle tools), and its tools are largely only carried by specialty bike shops and not big box retailers like Lisle. Maybe I should've described Lisle as "leading"...

The coverage of tool companies is really weak on Wikipedia, and this sort of thing isn't helpful (why is speedy deletion ever even used for anything but obvious spam?). Porter-Cable, one of the most significant manufacturers of power tools—the guys who created, for instance, the modern circular saw—didn't have an article until I created it a few weeks ago (not even a stub; Porter-Cable merely redirected to parent company Black & Decker). Klein Tools, which is practically synonymous with electricians, still doesn't have an article (when I create that one, will someone try to delete it too?). DeVilbiss Air Power Company, who makes the Craftsman air compressors you can buy at any Sears or Kmart in the United States, doesn't get but a few words either (still working on that one). Stanley Proto, a well known maker of industrial tools, doesn't even get a particularly well formatted line on the proto disambiguation page (and Proto has the benefit of being owned by The Stanley Works, which is well known enough to be sold at Wal-Mart). Hell, even Craftsman, one of the most well known tool manufacturers in the country, has a pretty sparse article that barely describes the line and makes scarce mention of its high end (Craftsman Professional) and low end (evolv, with almost no mention at all of the Companion line except to say that it's not around anymore). DeWalt is one of the most popular brands of professional power tools, but you'd never know it from its sloppy article.

These are tools that thousands or maybe even millions of people—hobbyists to professionals—use every day, discuss, debate, and rely on, but they barely make a blip on the Wikipedia radar. I don't know what to say. Hand tools in general don't have the largest presence on the internet, and it seems like notability on the internet is pretty much defined by how popular something is on the internet. I can't do a or  and prove it, but these tool companies are significant and notable all the same, and I intend to work to give them some sort of presence on Wikipedia because nobody else has yet done so. I don't know what to tell you.

--typhoon (talk) 07:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I guess my notability argument is basically, "They've been around a while, they make a lot of stuff, a lot of people know them, and you can find them at a lot of common stores," which sounds insubstantial, but I struggle to think of how, say, the articles for Stanley Works or Black & Decker, make an argument for notability that's any different from mine. --typhoon (talk) 07:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I added some references. Coverage in reliable sources, such as books, newspapers and magazines, is the key to establishing notability at Wikipedia. — Eastmain (talk) 09:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for helping. --typhoon (talk)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Lisle Corporation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100405045730/http://www.lislecorp.com:80/about/ to http://www.lislecorp.com/about/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 02:18, 30 January 2016 (UTC)