Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers


 * 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. As a copyright violation. No consensus about notability.  Sandstein  11:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Bringing this following a declined PROD. I cannot find any evidence in the article or online that establishes notability per WP:CORP

I believe some of the history section is actually a copyvio, but haven't found the source. It's not too promotional so I haven't wiped it on that grounds since I think the creator is editing in good faith. I'm just not sure it's notable. StarM 03:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and cleanup. The organization appears to be the trade association/lobbying group for the refinery industry. It's president is routinely cited in the press. As such it is probably notable. The content is overly promotional. The second paragraph is closely paraphrased from here. GabrielF (talk) 04:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, but Rewrite. In the context of notability, this article is actually notable because I looked them up on Google and it finds WAY too many websites on this for it to be not notable. However, where the real problem lies is in the major advertisement them theme on the page. This article ought to be rewritten, but not destroyed. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:15, 10 March 2014 (UTC) (Edited --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC))
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, their President might be regularly cited, but that's not an indication of notability, an indication of notability would be independent and reliable sources that covered the organisation in depth. I haven't been able to find anything like this (lots of little throwaway mentions, but nothing substantial).  I don't think this meets the WP:GNG.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:19, 13 March 2014 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 11:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - many meetings attract a thousand attendees. This would need a total re-write to be more than spam. Bearian (talk) 22:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. See my comment above about rewriting. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete G12, more or less identical to . --j⚛e deckertalk 02:11, 23 March 2014 (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.