Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Paint


 * 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. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:10, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

International Paint

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article about a paint company. The only independent reference supplied, the book "Dutch and Flemish still-life paintings" does not contain any reference to "International Paint" according to a search on Google Books, so seems completely unrelated. This leaves only one reference to the company's website, which is not a independent, published source. So the notability of this subject has not been established. Sparthorse (talk) 16:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Phil Bridger (talk) 16:41, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding the specific reference. However, I don't think this is referring to the same company. According to the article, the company International Paint was founded by brothers called Holzapfel in 1881. The reference is to a company called International Paint and Compositions Company founded by someone called Hartzman. If you look at which is, I believe, the subject of the article, I think it is clear these are different companies. If we could get further references, it might be easier to tell. Sparthorse (talk) 17:18, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The specific reference, with the page number, was already in the article, and if you read it a bit more carefully you will see that the International Paint and Compositions Company was founded by someone called Holzapfel with someone called Hartzman. If you then, as I suggested when I contested the WP:PROD tag, use Google Books searches you will find that the International Paint and Compositions Company was later renamed to International Paint and acquired by Akzo. I have no interest in spending my time expanding this article, but it is pretty clear that plenty of sources exist that can be used by others to do so. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Can't say about "Dutch and Flemish still-life paintings" but search by Google Books gives several results confirming the fact which was referenced by "Dutch and Flemish still-life paintings". There is also a number of search results by Google Books and Google News. Did you checked these before nominating this article for AfD? Beagel (talk) 17:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. To explain the notability of the company, I have augmented the article with a historic paragraph (with public refs), outlining the long history of the company, indicating the importance of International to the Tyne and Wear industrial area. I'm searching for public references into paint markets, which can clarify the huge size of the company (by far the largest) in its field. I expect help for the group of volunteers later this week.  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  23:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC).
 * Userify as subject is close to notability but some referencing and detail issues need to be sorted. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've now added several independent (non AkzoNobel) references. Further details to be added are about the production sites (locations, capacity) and where possible numerical data. Is that what you had in mind?  Wim van Dorst  (talk)  17:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC).
 * I'll say the word keep in bold just in case my position isn't clear from my edits above. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:14, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. As I said in my previous comment, there are number of references. In addition, International Paint is a market leader in its segment. Beagel (talk) 19:58, 19 November 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.