Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guangdong Loongon


 * 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.  A  Train ''talk 20:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Guangdong Loongon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non-notable toy company. The trademark dispute does not show notability by itself.  DGG ( talk ) 03:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Why does Wikipedia include these European and North American companies and exclude larger Chinese companies? I do not understand the reasoning for that, although maybe some Wikipedians have played with these smaller North American and European brands and thus have emotional affinity to them and that personal connection is lacking from this Chinese family of brands?
 * delete as not notable; per nom a small trademark dispute does not establish notability, and searches turn up nothing better.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 22:03, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * keep this is a notable company, the Danish press is consistently covering this company because of its copies of Lego. Just this weekend there was more coverage Lego knock-offs from China spreading to the European market.  This maker also licenses creations of popular Lego creators as well, unlike other brands and it has its own non-infringing brands, such as Cogo.  This manufacturer sells a ton of product, much more than the other Lego compatible brick companies that do have Wikipedia articles:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best-Lock
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobi_(building_blocks)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kre-O
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_(toy_company)

Also, this is not a trademark dispute as but rather an intellectual property dispute, Lepin took the full designs of the Lego sets in question. --Nipnop88 (talk) 12:18, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Lastly the reason I created this article is that many people were confused about who was manufacturing Lepin and Xingbao. Some people were saying it was Meizi Model. see here, ". In a post on Facebook, there are images of a company called Xingbao (星堡) who is owned by Meizi Model (美致模型), which is the same company that owns LEPIN" But the manufacturer is actually Loongon. This is why Wikipedia exists - to clarify questions that confuse me and provide a reference so that when people talk about the multitude of Chinese brands of Lego clones they can get correct answers. Already someone is covertly editing the Loongon page to remove mentions of Xingbao here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Guangdong_Loongon&diff=prev&oldid=788562340 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Guangdong_Loongon&type=revision&diff=788562566&oldid=788562502 -- maybe this person could clarify the relationships between these subbrands? --Nipnop88 (talk) 12:28, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Any additional details you could include from Denmark's media (home land of Lego) ? Doidlodilalodaiodloadodolodiododoldidoldilodo (talk) 18:12, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  12:24, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Articles I found in the Dutch media: --14:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipnop88 (talk • contribs)
 * http://cphpost.dk/news/business/lego-knock-offs-from-china-spreading-to-the-european-market.html "Lego knock-offs from China spreading to the European market"
 * http://cphpost.dk/news/business/fierce-copyright-battle-mars-legos-push-in-china.html "Fierce copyright battle mars Lego’s push in China: Lepin producing toys that look exactly like those produced by Lego."
 * http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/penge/falske-lego-klodser-spreder-sig-hastigt-i-europa "False Lego bricks is spreading rapidly in Europe"
 * http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/penge/eksperter-overraskende-lego-kopier-faar-lov-sprede-sig "Experts: Surprising that Lego copies allowed to spread"
 * http://borsen.dk/nyheder/generelt/artikel/1/347468/det_skriver_medierne_kapitalfonde_har_fuld_fart_paa_opkoeb.html "Chinese Lego replica Lepin has been successful in spreading its copy blocks to European markets through online stores. This happens even though Lego in late 2016 sued Lepin by a Chinese court. (Page 3)"
 * http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/penge/kinas-stenrige-netkonge-udfordrer-lego "China's wealthist business man challenges Lego: One of China's richest business men, Jack Ma, earn money to spread Lego copies across the country." - about AliExpress being used to sell Lepin.
 * http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/penge/kopifirma-ignorerer-legos-sagsanlaeg "Copy Company ignores Legos lawsuit: Lego has sued Lepin, but copy the company continues to sell imitations."
 * https://www.blick.ch/news/wirtschaft/blick-testet-aliexpress-die-chinesische-amazon-kopie-nicht-mal-die-haare-sind-echt-id5378426.html "Not even the hair is genuine. The prices on the Chinese online store Aliexpress are alluringly cheap. But often you get fake goods, as the BLICK test shows." (Swiss media)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:03, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:05, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete because promotionalism nearly always outweighs our policies and it's because these sources (1-8) are only general news, and not the significant coverage we need in notability, even when considering it was a noticed lawsuit. The author has signs of a possible COI, but even if not, there's enough to support removal. In the current article, 1-3 and 5 are literally listings and the 4 and 6 are general news. As always, there's Draftspace if anyone wants to restart a better and improved article. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 18:04, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I have no conflict of interest. What do you think of the 8 Dutch language articles I linked to above? --Nipnop88 (talk) 20:41, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources found by Nipnop88. The company passes Notability. There is no promotionalism. The sources and the Wikipedia article both discuss the company's getting sued by Lego for allegedly manufacturing and distributing counterfeit Lego sets. Cunard (talk) 06:19, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: The articles said to be in Dutch media are actually in Swiss and Danish media (which makes more sense for Lego). Matt's talk 08:59, 25 July 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.