Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/54°40' Orphyte


 * 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 delete.  Sandstein  10:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

54°40' Orphyte

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article on an American corporation has only one source (of questionable quality) and fails the GNG.

In a previous RSN discussion, the solitary source for this article (Designers & Dragons) was closed, in part, as "Not recommended for use in biographies of living people..." Much of the content of this questionable source relates to the financial affairs of living persons, specifically their ownership stakes and transactional activities with regard to this company and is, therefore, circumscribed by the consensus with no substantially non-BLP related content in the book by which the company could, generally, be referenced in any WP:CORPDEPTH manner without intersecting living people. Further, there was no consensus in the RSN discussion that this book could be used to establish notability (half of participating editors specifically rejected using D&D to establish notability).

This single book aside, a standard BEFORE (JSTOR, newspapers.com, Google Books, Google News) finds no RS. I would expect a notable WP:COMPANY to be referenced in at least several unambiguously RS places, as is customary. Chetsford (talk) 09:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 09:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 09:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 09:14, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep if more sources can be found, or merge relevant information to Pacesetter Ltd. BOZ (talk) 12:27, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete I really do not understand the "keep if more sources can be found" vote - either show that sources exist, or you have to vote delete/redirect/merge. No reliable, independent sources can be found to support the notability of this article, and based purely on that it should be deleted. Saying "I'd like to save this article - can someone else please do it for me?" is not a valid position to take. FOARP (talk) 15:31, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:20, 21 November 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:37, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: does not meet WP:NCORP; significant RS coverage not found. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC)


 * 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.