Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IBM Austin Research Laboratory


 * 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. Tone 22:31, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

IBM Austin Research Laboratory

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I prodded it with "No evidence this company passes WP:NCOMPANY/GNG. Could redirect to IBM research, through it's dubious this sub-lab is a likely searchable term." Prod was declined, an anon redirected it later, that was reverted. Time for an AfD discussion. What makes this research institute separately notable from its parent company (IBM Research)? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  10:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:07, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete very little independent coverage, could just be included on parent company's page.  → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - ( Talk ) -  12:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. But we need to see a serious merge proposal and discussion first.  The previous so-called merge that I reverted was just a delete, with the merge target article getting smaller when 6 other articles were deleted.  This was just wrong.  If we don't have a sensible merge plan for the more minor sites, keep them.  For the major sites like Almaden and Zurich, just keep. Dicklyon (talk) 02:32, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Only needs glancing mention at IBM Research if at all. 45.19.55.132 (talk) 03:30, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 19:56, 17 January 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 21:40, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: Doesn't appear to be independently notable. the suggestion of redirect and perhaps a merge based on secondary sourcing (which appears to be lacking in the current article) is reasonable, however. Waggie (talk) 01:00, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is nothing in reliable sources to suggest that this particular location/unit has any standalone notability. -- Kinu t/c 23:21, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete . Its clearly not notable on its own. I'd go with merge, but there hardly seems to be enough even for that. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:29, 30 January 2020 (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.