Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BoND


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Spartaz Humbug! 20:37, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

BoND

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

Sources exist that prove this business entity is in existence in New York, United States. Existence is not notability. Based on my evaluation of WP:NCORP, the sources present do not satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH.

Shortly after I PROD the article, someone objected it and dropped a NY Times aticle, as an external link. The Hunt is a column in which NY Times is acting in the capacity of a local paper covering house search in NY and the newly added article fails to provide any coverage of BoND as a business. per WP:INHERITORG, coverage on the proprietors do not permeate into their company even if they are individually notable for reasons other than the company in question. Graywalls (talk) 18:58, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and New York. Graywalls (talk) 18:58, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Comment searches for "BoND" generate a thousands of extraneous hits for "bond". I suggest searching using "Noam Dvir" +"Daniel Rauchwerger", the two partners. -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 19:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * All the coverage in the world about one of them individually, or about the pair have very little weight to establish notability for the legal entity; unless significant, in depth, independent coverage and analysis of them with relation to the company they've established, or about the company itself can be found. One has to be broadly circulated. Their house hunting endeavor in their personal life covered in The Hunt column of the New York Times acting in their agency as a local paper don't have any notability weight. The only thing that article did is to be a reliable source that the two men were correspondents for the Haaretz paper at one point. So, it is reliable source to verify that, but not to establish a grain of notability for their company. Graywalls (talk) 19:32, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * BoND is a two-man design firm. It could just have easily been named "Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger" - we have these sorts of BLPs that cover two closely-connected people together. I think we're wrong to focus on the "legal entity" alone. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 19:10, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have notified Peoplelikeyoulikeme, the article's creator -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 19:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Some more sources I found online; I'm sure there are more out there; these 2 men are prominent:
 * General:
 * Reviews of their work:
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * By the way, here's the link to that New York Times article mentioned above:
 * Personally, I think it's more relevant than Graywalls says but I suggest others take a look and decide for themselves.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:11, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:16, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The said reference was already present as a source in the article when I stumbled upon it and I don't see the justification why a duplicate was copied into "further reading". This is in The Hunt column section of the NYT which you can see at https://www.nytimes.com/column/the-hunt which solicits people to contact them about their recent home purchase. The select few chosen gets in depth coverage about their home purchase. In the case of these two men, it was about their personal purchase. The article does not touch about the business they own. Any amount of notability the pair accumulated do not pass through to their business. This is made clear by inherited notability guideline which says ownership by notable people do not bestow notability into the business. Graywalls (talk) 21:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * See also WP:ARCHITECT item 3:
 * ” The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series)”
 * — A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 22:11, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The guideline you're quoting is not relevant here, because this article is about their company. Similarly, bands or band members qualify through WP:NBAND, architects through WP:ARCHITECT. Architectural firms, recording companies are evaluated through WP:NCORP. Graywalls (talk) 22:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * By the way, here's the link to that New York Times article mentioned above:
 * Personally, I think it's more relevant than Graywalls says but I suggest others take a look and decide for themselves.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:11, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:16, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The said reference was already present as a source in the article when I stumbled upon it and I don't see the justification why a duplicate was copied into "further reading". This is in The Hunt column section of the NYT which you can see at https://www.nytimes.com/column/the-hunt which solicits people to contact them about their recent home purchase. The select few chosen gets in depth coverage about their home purchase. In the case of these two men, it was about their personal purchase. The article does not touch about the business they own. Any amount of notability the pair accumulated do not pass through to their business. This is made clear by inherited notability guideline which says ownership by notable people do not bestow notability into the business. Graywalls (talk) 21:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * See also WP:ARCHITECT item 3:
 * ” The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series)”
 * — A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 22:11, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The guideline you're quoting is not relevant here, because this article is about their company. Similarly, bands or band members qualify through WP:NBAND, architects through WP:ARCHITECT. Architectural firms, recording companies are evaluated through WP:NCORP. Graywalls (talk) 22:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * ” The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series)”
 * — A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 22:11, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The guideline you're quoting is not relevant here, because this article is about their company. Similarly, bands or band members qualify through WP:NBAND, architects through WP:ARCHITECT. Architectural firms, recording companies are evaluated through WP:NCORP. Graywalls (talk) 22:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)


 * A few more. Some links are to Google translations into English. Starting to look sorta famous in interior design circles:
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Would you name the two or three out of those that you would suggest for the purpose of establishing business notability so other editors are not burdened with having to go through every single one of them? This is often a significant hardship in deletion discussion in people, product and company articles. Those authored by the same journalist, or from same publication counts as one. Those based on interviews with company personnel or press releases do not pass. WP:ORGIND Graywalls (talk) 03:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Graywalls, I appreciate your enthusiasm for keeping Wikipedia clear of unsourced articles. However, I think you're overly focused on establishing notability as a business independent of the married couple that are the business: Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger. There's just two people. BoND is short for "Bureau of Noam & Daniel"
 * There are no articles that are only about "BoND", a company.
 * Should we just rename the article "Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger", turning it into a people article? They've gotten coverage in multiple countries. Also, in their pre-BoND period, they did some noteworthy stuff at Harvard.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 03:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Would you name the two or three out of those that you would suggest for the purpose of establishing business notability so other editors are not burdened with having to go through every single one of them? This is often a significant hardship in deletion discussion in people, product and company articles. Those authored by the same journalist, or from same publication counts as one. Those based on interviews with company personnel or press releases do not pass. WP:ORGIND Graywalls (talk) 03:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Graywalls, I appreciate your enthusiasm for keeping Wikipedia clear of unsourced articles. However, I think you're overly focused on establishing notability as a business independent of the married couple that are the business: Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger. There's just two people. BoND is short for "Bureau of Noam & Daniel"
 * There are no articles that are only about "BoND", a company.
 * Should we just rename the article "Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger", turning it into a people article? They've gotten coverage in multiple countries. Also, in their pre-BoND period, they did some noteworthy stuff at Harvard.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 03:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Would you name the two or three out of those that you would suggest for the purpose of establishing business notability so other editors are not burdened with having to go through every single one of them? This is often a significant hardship in deletion discussion in people, product and company articles. Those authored by the same journalist, or from same publication counts as one. Those based on interviews with company personnel or press releases do not pass. WP:ORGIND Graywalls (talk) 03:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Graywalls, I appreciate your enthusiasm for keeping Wikipedia clear of unsourced articles. However, I think you're overly focused on establishing notability as a business independent of the married couple that are the business: Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger. There's just two people. BoND is short for "Bureau of Noam & Daniel"
 * There are no articles that are only about "BoND", a company.
 * Should we just rename the article "Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger", turning it into a people article? They've gotten coverage in multiple countries. Also, in their pre-BoND period, they did some noteworthy stuff at Harvard.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 03:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Would you name the two or three out of those that you would suggest for the purpose of establishing business notability so other editors are not burdened with having to go through every single one of them? This is often a significant hardship in deletion discussion in people, product and company articles. Those authored by the same journalist, or from same publication counts as one. Those based on interviews with company personnel or press releases do not pass. WP:ORGIND Graywalls (talk) 03:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Graywalls, I appreciate your enthusiasm for keeping Wikipedia clear of unsourced articles. However, I think you're overly focused on establishing notability as a business independent of the married couple that are the business: Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger. There's just two people. BoND is short for "Bureau of Noam & Daniel"
 * There are no articles that are only about "BoND", a company.
 * Should we just rename the article "Noam Dvir and Daniel Rauchwerger", turning it into a people article? They've gotten coverage in multiple countries. Also, in their pre-BoND period, they did some noteworthy stuff at Harvard.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 03:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

We can certainly chronicle their journey into forming the company in the background or history section; but those do not contribute towards notability. This article is about their architectural firm, a company. The proprietors chose to play off their names but coverage about them as individuals do not credit towards the business. In Wikipedia, a tuning shop owned by a renowned former race car driver can not piggy back notability off coverage that is not significant about the shop. It does not matter what how the business is named. If the coverage is not for the business, it does not count towards notability. We need CORPDEPTH and AUD passing coverage on the BoND, not about their proprietors outside of the article subject business. Graywalls (talk) 05:13, 11 July 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: The standard to be met here is NCORP so standard notability is irrelevant. Please can we refocus on that and identify the sources that meet the standard. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 07:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep based on the above discussion. Oaktree b (talk) 01:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * I've just randomly selected three articles from the above (picked the clearly international ones) that don't pass WP:NCORP, but there's also a lot of press - what are the best WP:THREE articles please? SportingFlyer  T · C  22:35, 26 July 2023 (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.