Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C.R.Kennedy & Company Pty Ltd


 * 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; while there are certainly sources which allow some bits and bobs to pass WP:V, the same cannot be said of sources which provide the "significant" coverage required by WP:ORG. Ironholds (talk) 00:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

C.R.Kennedy &amp; Company Pty Ltd
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Promo article for a non-notable firm. A7 was declined because it's a "major company", which it clearly is not. Miracle Pen (talk) 16:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I agree that this company is clearly a minor company, not to mention I didn't get ANY notable links on both Yahoo! and Google. Keep - The article has been provided with more sources than before, so I think the article should be good for now. SwisterTwister   talk  01:14, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * But the article still fails WP:ORG. The number of references isn't the problem, notability is. Miracle Pen (talk) 07:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   05:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. I added some references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - reading through the references added, could not call them significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Passing mentions, routine transactions, press releases, nothing independent of depth.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment The problem is not a lack of references. The problem is that the company fails WP:ORG. It's not notable - it's an obscure camera distributor in Australia. The references (thanks for your work anyway, Eastmain) prove it - all of them are the sort of irrelevancies 137.122.49.102 lists. Miracle Pen (talk) 07:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  — Eastmain (talk • contribs)  23:54, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete non-notable minor company. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:24, 13 August 2011 (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.