Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drum Workshop


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Drum Workshop

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Listing as per Articles for deletion/Drum Channel (2nd nomination). delete UtherSRG (talk) 04:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I was all set to say "delete" when I saw the article, it has no outside sources at all. But a little searching found this. I don't suppose one article in the LA Times qualifies as multiple outside sourcing, but there are also many references to their drums in articles about musicians; I could be persuaded that the article passes muster if a few more sources were provided. --MelanieN (talk) 03:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Strong Keep Drum Workshop is arguably considered the biggest independent, high quality drum manufacturer on the planet. I had to do a double take when I saw it in AfD. Anyway, the problem here seems to be that the references and tone need work. Open any copy of Modern Drummer and within a page or two a DW ad will show up, or they will interview a drummer that endorses the product, etc., etc. In short, the company is considered something of a Rolls Royce of drum manufacturers. Give me a few days and I will clean it up. We do want to keep this one as it will come back eventually anyway, they are that big. It would not be unlike saying we don't want an article on Chevron or K-Mart. Nineteen Nightmares (talk) 01:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Nineteen Nightmares
 * I've added two references and cleaned up much of the offending tone of the article. Give me some time and I'll add more references and general editing. Nineteen Nightmares (talk) 01:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Nineteen Nightmares

I've added five references, properly placed, as well as several external links to the company's own websites. Though I've only added five, there are near unlimited amounts of references, both in print and online. I also cleaned up the article quite a bit through editing, as well as removing the anecdotal portions and making it much more "Wiki." Nineteen Nightmares (talk) 18:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Nineteen Nightmares
 * Keep.  Mentioned in several books, with at least one of those books including a couple pages of coverage on the company.  That's plenty to establish notability, and additional sources will turn up, my search was intentionally narrow to get quick results just for the AfD. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 03:32, 4 June 2010 (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.