Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alta Architects


 * 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 no consensus. I initially closed this discussion as a Soft Delete because no one was advocating Keeping this article and later realized that no one was actually arguing for its Deletion either so I restored it to close as No Consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 06:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Alta Architects

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This business has apparently operated under three names recently: Alta Architects, Muñoz and Company, and Kell Muñoz Architects (I moved it to its current name, but previously the article was at Kell Muñoz Architects). Looking at sources it appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:NCORP—most mentions are in passing in articles about either the CEO or a building the firm worked on. There was a past AfD in 2010 (Articles for deletion/Kell Muñoz Architects) which was withdrawn after the page was updated with non-primary sources, but I'm not sure notability is clearly established here.

I'm ignoring a few sources which mention the company in passing but are about CEO Henry Muñoz in other contexts (who may be notable himself, based on stuff like, , ). I also excluded a few sources from the article itself which seem to be databases with extremely limited information. The American Latino Museum page is offline and doesn't appear on the Wayback Machine. Overall, lots of things mention this firm, but not a lot seems to imply the firm itself is significant; they've clearly worked on a few significant buildings, though.

The article itself also reads a bit WP:PROMO, though I don't think WP:TNT would apply here if it's otherwise notable. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 01:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Business.  Dylnuge  (Talk • Edits) 01:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Been around since 1927, I'd expect something to show up, what we have now is a few paragraphs, appears almost to be a copy of a company directory. It doesn't give much more than basic facts about the company. The source table helps, but I'm not ready to pull the plug yet. Oaktree b (talk) 03:40, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking at their about page (primary non-independent source, but I have no reason to doubt the info for research purposes) it seems like they change their name a lot. Names used by the firm listed on that page are "Eickenroht & Cocke," "Bartlett Cocke, Architects," "Bartlett Cocke & Associates," "Bartlett Cocke & Associates, Inc.," "Chumney, Jones & Kell, Inc.," "Jones & Kell, Inc.," "Kell Muñoz Wigodsky, Inc.," "Kell Muñoz Architects, Inc.," "Muñoz & Company, Inc.," and the current name, "Alta Architects."
 * I hadn't searched under any of the names prior to "Kell Muñoz" so this is likely a good jumping off point for more sources! I should have a chance to look into it a bit more this weekend; given the number of notable buildings they were involved in, this feels like a firm that is notable, even though I wasn't finding much. Dylnuge  (Talk • Edits) 05:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * To make things more confusing (because who doesn't love that) there is a Texas based contracting firm called "Bartlett Cocke," which is still operating under that name today. As far as I can tell they're a fully independent firm that just happened to be founded by the same guy who was a principal at what is now Alta (see, primary non-independent source). At any rate, my initial pass at searching under these names didn't really help me much; I found more coverage that was passing mentions in an article about a building (often as a secondary architecture firm). I certainly believe they are a well established company but at the moment it still feels like they fall short of WP:NCORP. Dylnuge  (Talk • Edits) 15:52, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Do you have access to the San Antonio Express-News article in full? ProQuest does not appear to have a copy of the article (other than a two sentence abstract which actually might even be the entire amount written....) which is the link provided.  HighKing++ 15:35, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @HighKing I do but it's not freely available. Are you on WP:Discord? I can send you a copy. (It also might be available in full through other ProQuest subscriptions, but it's not on TWL or NYPL's ProQuest access) Dylnuge  (Talk • Edits) 19:30, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Nah, I don't need to see it if you can simply verify whether it contains in-depth "Independent Content" about the company. For the most part, I agree that there doesn't appear to be sufficient sources that meet the criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing++ 16:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a recent comment to this discussion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Texas.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.