Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beerenberg Farm (2nd nomination)


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 00:50, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Beerenberg Farm
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Advertisement-style article for a farm/small company of 50 employees. It's difficult to see any notability. Also, there are no reliable third party sources that establish notability. The only third party source cited only briefly mentions it in the context of other local businesses in some area, doesn't discuss the subject in detail, and doesn't meet the requirements for establishing notability. Vanasan (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep It is easy to see notability.  Unscintillating (talk) 21:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note that the nomination statement for this nomination to which I replied was, A farm/small company of 50 employees. It's difficult to see any notability. Vanasan (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I am changing to Speedy keep. Subsequent to creating the nomination, and after two editors had specifically replied to the nomination and a third had posted a !vote, the nominator changed the nomination without showing the inserts, which is a bad edit as per WP:REDACT "Removing or substantially altering a comment after it has been replied to may deprive the reply of its original context."  Fifteen hours after the nomination, the nominator now reports the presence of dead links in the article references.  Since it is unlikely that these dead links went dead between the time of the nomination and 15 hours later, this is evidence that the AfD was begun without researching the references in the article.  Dead links combined with WP:AGF and WP:V are verifiable evidence.  Contrary to WP:N, the new nomination statement incorrectly implies that notability is defined by the content of the Wikipedia article.  Similarly, the new nomination still brings no evidence (i.e., examples of searches as discussed in WP:BEFORE) that the topic either is or is not notable.  There is still no analysis of any defects in the previous AfD, or why we need a new one.  Unscintillating (talk) 16:02, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I checked one of the dead links, and that led to this link, which not only supports the notability of the topic, but indicates that there is a longer "Report" available from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Unscintillating (talk) 16:02, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep It is easy for me to see notability, by using the Google News Archive tool. I see many articles about this six generation family business going back to 1839, which has used modern marketing and web tools to create high visibility in the 21st century. Here is one example of significant coverage in reliable sources. Here is another. Several others are readily available.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  22:07, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Where I am from, most farms are older than 1839. That's not something exceptional, on the contrary. It's not something exceptional that the same family owns the farm either, there are probably millions of other farms on the planet owned by the same family since the 19th century. Beerenberg Farm is a very small company, founded in 1969, on a farm owned by a family since the 19th century. Completely unexceptional. As far as I can tell, a Google news search mostly produces results unrelated to the farm (there are multiple other companies called Beerenberg, eg. Vanasan (talk) 22:37, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems likely that the vast majority of those other farms you mentioned are not notable. This one is, because it has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, such as the two I pointed out. Presumably, all those other farms you allude to haven't. The fact that some Google hits are false positives is irrelevant. It is the "true positives" that count. The age of the farm is not definitive with regards to notability, especially where you live. But in Australia where this farm is located, and in California where I live, ventures of that age are often considered historically significant. And this company is more than a simple farm; it is a manufacturer of branded specialty food products.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  23:17, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Source no. 1 (as of ) does not discuss the subject in detail but only briefly mentions it in the context of local businesses, and doesn't indicate notability.
 * Souce no. 2 only says "403 - ACCESS DENIED"
 * Source no. 3 says "Sorry, Page not Found"
 * Source no. 4 doesn't mention the subject at all.
 * Source no. 5 says "Sorry, Page not Found"
 * Source no. 6 says "404-Page not found"
 * And finally, source no. 7, a site that ostensibly promote local tourism in some Australian region, says "Internal Server Error"
 * So in fact, you are proposing that we retain a promotional article written as an advertisement, whose only third party source is a very very brief mention along with other local businesses in some area in a newspaper article. That source doesn't meet the requirements to establish any notability. Obviously, the notability treshold is the same for companies whether they are based in Australia or in Europe. Being a manufacturer of food products does not in itself establish notability, when the company is a small business of 50 employees. There are bigger companies that have been deleted from Wikipedia because of lack of notability. It wasn't a company in 1839, but an ordinary farm, so its business history starts only in 1969 or so. And in fact, most farms of my country are indeed the subject of some coverage in third party reliable sources. Whether books on farms in a given region, books on local history, or local newspapers. But like in this case, that does not establish notability. Vanasan (talk) 11:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, interestingly, this supposedly famous company's website only says "Service Unavailable." Vanasan (talk) 12:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, unlike most farms, this one has third-party coverage in reliable sources. Meets WP:GNG.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:04, 21 April 2013 (UTC).


 * Note that I'm changing from delete to speedy delete in light the above comments and the fact that the article doesn't cite a single reliable source except a brief mention here that doesn't establish notability, and in light of the fact that there seems to be no adequate sources demonstrating the article to be anything else than an improper advertisement for an unnotable farm/small business. The possibility of some limited coverage in various local media that has been alluded to by some doesn't establish notability, as it's completely unexceptional that a farm or small business occasionally is mentioned in local media. Vanasan (talk) 20:07, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * In response to Vanasan's concerns, I have added five references to reliable sources, and have removed all dead links. In addition, I checked the company's website on both my desktop computer and my mobile phone. It works just fine.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  20:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I also had no trouble with accessing the company's website. Unscintillating (talk) 00:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notability seems to have been established. - Shiftchange (talk) 12:17, 25 April 2013 (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.