Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dewrance & Co. 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Dewrance & Co. Ltd

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article fails to demonstrate the notability of Dewrance & Co. Ltd. Neither its text nor its sources show that it "has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." Eddie Blick (talk) 02:04, 2 April 2017 (UTC) It is hardly surprising that a company which folded so long ago does not have much internet presence. The three sources quoted are however reliable and independent, and I expect to find more printed sources. Besides the company had a steam engine named after it. that is pretty good evidence of notability. Rathfelder (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails GNG and NCORP after Google showed nothing to add secondary sources. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 14:12, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The sources show this company existed which is not in dispute. However, nothing indicates it is notable. WP is not a comprehensive business directory. Fails WP:NCORP. MB 15:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

The British Government repeatedly recognised the importance of the company by awarding honours to its employees. Its records are stored in the British National Archives. Involvement with the first viable steam locomotive seems quite notable.Rathfelder (talk) 17:23, 16 April 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Article has undergone a significant transformation since the last "delete" vote. More comments needed.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 22:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Any revised thoughts in light of the new sources and content? –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 22:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The sources were still primary and with respect with the sources.   KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 11:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't understand what is meant by "The sources were still primary". Rathfelder (talk) 19:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Most of the sources are just mentions of the company in directories. Nothing here to make it notable. I don't find the whole Recognition section to really add anything either to the companies notability. There is one statement that its products have become collectable. The one ref about that seems to be just a auction/sale listing - not independent coverage. If there was such coverage today in publications that write about collectables, that might be the best way to establish notability.  But as of now, everything still looks routine. See WP:PRIMARY. MB 23:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)


 * If a company's employees are repeatedly given awards by the government, the government puts its records into the national archives and a rival firm names a steam engine after it I think that is good evidence of notability.Rathfelder (talk) 21:49, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The question is not whether this is a good article with good sources. The question is whether the subject is notable.Rathfelder (talk) 21:28, 25 April 2017 (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.