Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hogan Construction Group


 * 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. Shimeru (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Hogan Construction Group

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Construction company with unclear notability. The main assertion of significance in the article is that the company built the city hall of Snellville, Georgia. This cannot be confirmed by anything that turns up in Google News. In fact, the only item that turns up in Google News is this article, where the mention of the Hogan Group only qualifies as trivial. Delete.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 20:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment ??? I count 15 articles, many of them from newspapers, about the company being awarded contracts. In particular, there were multiple ones covering the bid for 2 buildings, one of which was the new Snellville city hall.  I don't know what you were searching, but I clicked on 'news' at the beginning of this article.  Now.  I don't know if 15 mentions of bids on 5-7 projects counts as notable, but there's far more than the nominator claims.  David V Houston (talk) 20:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Here's the link to my search results. As nominator, I didn't have the luxury of the link above before posting. I'll look into that. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 20:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Ah. right. BTW, searching 'news' with "Hogan Construction" (dropping the group) bring up about 5 more hits in the first 3 pages relating to what seems to be this group. David V Houston (talk) 20:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Now I see the problem: what I did was not an archives search, but rather a recent news search. However, it looks to me like every single one of the hits that were hidden from me in my original search are to pay sites, and they're all like, "by the way, the company that got the contract was Hogan," and then they resume talking about their original subject. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 20:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You notice I didn't !vote keep Just said the case wasn't quite as clear as you originally suggested.  David V Houston (talk) 23:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did notice that. :-) --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 01:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Apart from the concern raised by Blanchardb about the quality of the articles referred to as sources, announcements that the company got contracts are not exactly convincing evidence of notability. I can see nothing that looks to me like evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability criteria. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, article makes no claim of notability for this subject. Abductive  (reasoning) 05:00, 26 April 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.