Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Product Development


 * 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. North America1000 05:45, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

International Product Development

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable local organization. Most of the references are to the company's own website or do not discuss the company directly. I have not found any sources that satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 23:36, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:34, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:34, 23 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete: Per nom. Just not enough notability. Heavily doctored with primary sources. I read one source all the way to the bottom just to find brief passing mention. Otr500 (talk) 05:35, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment The article could no doubt do with some attention; their fairly generic company name makes searching for sources a bit harder than usual. However, searching for 'IPD + Volvo' found this, this and this - they seem like in-depth product reviews in independent publications, which might go some way to satisfying WP:NCORP. What I'm not seeing is much coverage of the company themselves - just product reviews. Girth Summit  (blether)  10:37, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The salient point here is that these sources are reviews of specific products, not the company that makes them. I don't think that qualifies as significant coverage for the company. The article from Automobile could be used to add some info on IPD's 2006 SEMA concept. But other than that, it doesn't seem like these sources could be used to expand our article or verify its existing content. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * After looking into this a bit further, it appears that the section on the IPD's 2006 SEMA concept was copy-pasted from Volvo C30. The Automobile source is more relevant there than it is in this article. The same thing applies to the Autoweek and Road & Track sources you linked—those can be incorporated into our article on the Volvo S40. Again, these sources don't seem to satisfy  WP:ORGDEPTH. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 01:07, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~SS49~   {talk}  00:20, 1 March 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tymon. r   Do you have any questions?  02:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - I second what Otr500 laid out Graywalls (talk) 11:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per Otr500 and His Lordship. Fails WP:GIG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:15, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I am unable to locate any sources that meet the criteria for establishing notability, topic fails GNG and WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 14:43, 12 March 2019 (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.