Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CBM Engineers


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:49, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

CBM Engineers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a puff piece. Worse yet, the author does not appear to have read WP:PEACOCK before writing it.

CBM Engineers was a consultancy firm. The president was Dr. Joseph Colaco, a notable man.

CBM no longer exists as a discrete company. Around 2011, CBM was merged into the Sterling Engineering Group of Companies, based in Houston, Texas.

I did a Google search for [ "sterling engineering group of companies" ]. Google returned just 36 results. Manta.com estimates that Sterling has about 35 employees. LinkedIn says "between 11 and 50" employees.

Despite the tall towers that it's designed contributed structural services to, I have not found any evidence that Sterling meets our inclusion criteria. I doubt that CBM met them either.

Delete per WP:NOTFORPROMOTION and per our general notability guideline. (Dear non-Wikipedian visitors: Please see WP:42 for a summary of the guideline.)

—Unforgettableid (talk), written 05:40, 19 August 2014 (UTC), edited 01:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Once notable, always notable. The firm did notable work, and its subsequent fate does not change its notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs)  11:14, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs)  11:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Alternatively, redirect to Joseph Colaco. Designing a notable building makes you notable, but providing "structural services", not so much. CBM wasn't the architect of any of the listed buildings and isn't even mentioned on half of the articles. You can't WP:INHERIT notability. Clarityfiend (talk) 15:38, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - The first reference (in Architect magazine) is inadequate as a reliable source as it merely lists the subject among various consultants and does not provide any substantive discussion. The second reference results in page not found.  I see no indication of notability.--Rpclod (talk) 17:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  15:01, 27 August 2014 (UTC)




 * Question/comment: how do you invoke Delete per WP:NOTFORPROMOTION for a company that is not in business?  Are you saying it was a promotional piece that should have been deleted, but wasn't, so now is just an absurd old promotional ad? &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 02:11, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, in reference to your nomination rationale, I found this Don't cite WP42 at AfD. I'm neutral on this one.  &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 02:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * This is a rather pointless essay that only exists because some people don't like it that articles need sources. WP:42 in fact does a decent job of summarizing our verifiability and notability requirements. Reyk  YO!  08:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per Rpclod and Clarityfiend. This company wasn't notable when it was a going concern. It's even less so now. LHMask me a question 15:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete- defunct company that was not notable during its existence, and is not notable now. Reyk  YO!  08:02, 10 September 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.