Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gecko Gear (2nd nomination)


 * 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   keep. Article passes WP:GNG. Who it's written by doesn't matter, COI is not a reason to delete. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  02:49, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Gecko Gear
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Renominating. Vanity article written by company founder. No assertion of notability (which would qualify it for A7 speedy, but admins seem to be very reluctant to speedy these useless articles for some reason, so I'm listing the article instead). Miracle Pen (talk) 12:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak delete These two articles in reliable sources mean that the topic may be notable: !Voting delete because the article is qualifies for A7 at the moment, and seriously needs work to save it. Perhaps a candidate for rescue?  Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  16:02, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Added sources, discovered 2 other companies sharing this name. Article now serves a disambiguation function also. Trilliumz (talk) 03:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Um, thanks for your diligence, I don't think that's the way disambiguation pages are supposed to work: instead of being a useless article about a non-notable company, it's now a useless article about three non-notable companies. Miracle Pen (talk) 04:55, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that this is an improvement, this was an article about the Australian company which showed some signs of notablality, if the other two companies are notable, individual articles can be made for them, and a disambiguation page made then. I have removed the other content (retained the relevant stuff) to avoid confusion, and so that this AfD can decide on the notability of the Australian company alone. Thanks for your work, I'm sorry to have to remove so much of it. Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  10:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * comment- i have no vote on the article itself, but I just wanted to point out that WP:SPEEDY covers why admins are unwilling to speedy delete the article. Specifically: "If a page has survived a prior deletion discussion, it should not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations." Umbralcorax (talk) 16:24, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 19:50, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Grahame (talk) 03:14, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable company. Keb25 (talk) 13:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The first result in a Google news archive search is http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/small-business/gecko-gear-makes-the-case-for-quality-iphone-accessories/story-e6frg9hf-1225941986108 which confirms notability without any reasonable doubt. If an article has a problem that can be fixed by editing, then fix it, don't try to delete it.   D r e a m Focus  15:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Does a 700-word puff piece confer notability? Miracle Pen (talk) 04:55, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Changing !vote to keep - no, but two >700-word puff pieces in reliable sources (The Australian & The Age) does confer notability, see WP:GNG. In response to Dream focus, I was afraid that what was wrong with the article could not be fixed by editing. Even after going through the sources, and trying to add to the article, we are left with a 5-line stub, just about enough in my opinion, but barely. Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  11:00, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The article in the Australian is 677 words, the article in the Age is longer but only mentions Gecko in passing. Miracle Pen (talk) 12:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough on the 677 words, my mistake, but the mention in The Age is hardly in passing, the first several paragraphs are about the company, and it mentioned again later in the article. Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  12:30, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Added two more RS to the list, Macworld and Brisbanetimes.com.au. Macworld calls this "a leading accessory brand in Australia" that has grown past being a local company to worldwide distribution. "Best case scenario" article from Brisbane.com.au also goes beyond a passing mention (WP:GNG), explaining the design and quality concerns for manufacture in China from an Australian perspective. This article adds overall geographical balance to the encyclopedia by describing the growth of a non-US startup as it works with its offshore / Chinese manufacturing partner. Trilliumz (talk) 00:06, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per Trilliumz (talk) and  D r e a m Focus  remarks and sources. --DThomsen8 (talk) 03:10, 17 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.