Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atlanship SA


 * 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 withdrawal per the sources found by Bushranger. Clearly I was looking in all the wrong places. Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 12:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Atlanship SA

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable shipping company. After trudging through all of the Google News hits written in the various languages spoken in Switzerland, I can safely conclude that there isn't any significant coverage of Atlanship. The referenced articles, external links, and Google News hits all revolve around The Orange Sun, a juice transportation ship, with Atlanship mentioned in passing as the operator of the ship. Fails Notability (organizations and companies) because Atlanship's notability can't be inherited from The Orange Sun. Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 16:35, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Page under construction. More information are available now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apm2891 (talk • contribs) 23:02, 3 March 2012 (UTC)  — Apm2891 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * very interesting to see how my morning juice come from! The references match with the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superwoman112 (talk • contribs) 04:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)  — Superwoman112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Neither of your posts have addressed my concerns with notability. Again, the sources don't cover Atlanship itself, but its ships, with the company mentioned in passing as the operator of the ships. In order for the Atlanship page to be kept, we will need to see direct coverage of Atlanship itself. Read over Notability (organizations and companies): "A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries. The organization or corporation itself must have been discussed in reliable independent sources for it to be considered notable." Furthermore, because Superwoman112 has made no contributions outside of this discussion, I suspect that she may be a meatpuppet. Chris the Paleontologist  (talk • contribs) 16:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Of whom? Or do you mean sockpuppet? - The Bushranger One ping only 01:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Of Apm32891. Chris the Paleontologist  (talk • contribs) 20:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:11, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - possible WP:COI concerns asisde, the company appears to be notable - references including Lloyd's Maritime Directory, the Fairplay World Shipping Directory, and The Shipping Revolution: the modern merchant ship are found through a quick check. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I did check for sources, but if I missed some significant coverage of the company itself, then I might withdraw. I'll look at those you mentioned. Chris the Paleontologist  (talk • contribs) 20:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * They were in Google Books; unfortunatly, none have views beyond snippets, but there're enough to make me certain enough that the truth sources is are out there to !vote keep. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - a shipping company with a multi-million pound turnover? Running 6 major ships? Supported by Bushranger's sources? Sounds notable to me.  79.77.226.51 (talk) 08:04, 7 March 2012 (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.