Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Parsons (company)


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 22:28, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Charles Parsons (company)

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

Non-notable. This article was PRODed in January 2015 as "Fails WP:GNG, non-notable", and the prod contested with the comment "A quick google search indicates that a proper WP:BEFORE may show GNG". The commenter has not edited the article, and nobody else has added any fruits of "a quick google search" either. There has been a certain pressure of promotional editing, including an amazingly elaborate advertisement here, but no sources. I have googled, of course, but failed to come up with anything other than the company's own pages and other advertising, including advertising lightly masquerading as news, such as this. The two references that have been there all along certainly don't show notability. Bishonen &#124; tålk 20:43, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not finding coverage that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH, just incidental mentions and routine mergers and acquisitions reporting. • Gene93k (talk) 02:20, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:CORP LibStar (talk) 00:14, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. seems to be based on an interview, and probably doesnt meet WP:AUD. https://apparelmagazine.co.nz/blog/charles-parsons-acquires-eclipse-textiles/ - news, not much about the company, and again WP:AUD. https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/102619197/swanndris-owner-buys-outdoor-clothing-brand-line-7-from-charles-parsons - a more significant publication, but coverage such as this is not enough for an article. Charles Parsons is also described as a "wellknown Australian textile wholesaler" in a book (https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Australian_Army_Uniform_and_the_Gove/kRBMDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1) but it's just a mention of that and a joint venture. The company was founded in 1915, so it's possible that there is significant coverage that is not available online, or not easily found by searching. A865 (talk) 18:09, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Agree with A865. I've added a few refs to IRSs I found via various database searches (content not visible is basic Google search). However there wasn't anything that I could find that was unarguably IRS. Having said that, as a matter of common sense, a 100+ year old company should potentially be able to meet GNG/ WP:CORP. Maybe the page just needs cite additions?? Cabrils (talk) 21:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - not enough citations provided and a Google search didnt bring up anything good. Caphadouk (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2022 (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.