Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alliance Laundry Systems


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Alliance Laundry Systems

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by anon User:2602:30A:2EFE:F050:E52A:8C67:E2A2:B864 with the following rationale "WP:CONTESTED"; that anon deprodded a number of articles with such meaningless rationale before disappearing, likely a WP:POINT disruption or a spammer trying to waste our time. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:36, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  Musa  Talk  06:31, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Musa  Talk  06:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - Searching online suggests sufficient independent substantive coverage to support WP:ORG notability.--Rpclod (talk) 07:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, its a company that does $700 million in revenue per year. As per Rpclod, there are sources available to meet WP:GNG. Antrocent (&#9835;&#9836;) 18:11, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep and there are likely archived sources which may be helpful. SwisterTwister   talk  07:04, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. And can anyone actually show a reliable source with in-depth coverage company of the subject? "Zillions of foo-ian currency revenue" is not a valid notability criteria. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:16, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, easily sourced to well above WP:GNG, sources to that effect have been added without need for Highbeam or Newspaperarchive searches. Sam Sailor Talk! 13:45, 17 November 2015 (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.