Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miller Electric


 * 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 (non-admin close) RMHED (talk) 19:11, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Miller Electric

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Various issues, primarily no external sources or compliance with WP:CORP. Prod contested with no valid rationale, only an extremely un-wikipedian assertion that the prodder should "just ask a welder" and stick to his own "scope of knowledge". The opinions of welders are not, AFAIK, preferred to Wikipedia policies when judging notability.  Dei z  talk 06:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Bad faith nomination by User:Deiz, owing to a disagreement between two editors (I'm the other) at Articles for deletion/Leo Blair (senior). Sadly I see that User:Deiz is an Admin, who ought to be above such petty squabbles. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's frankly insulting. I noticed an article that fails WP:CORP, and accordingly nominated it for deletion. There is no provision on Wikipedia for having to ignore failing articles simply because you noticed them through involvement in another discussion.  Dei z  talk 15:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Either you've a strangely coincidental interest in non-notable welding machine manufacturers, or else you were led here by following my edit trail from Leo Blair. Via my talk page, where you posted, "noticed some other issues you have been involved with". You didn't just "notice" this article, you were led here because you were sniffing my edits. Please, apply whatever good faith or civility you like about me, but don't pretend I'm an idiot. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Did I notice this on your talk page? Yes. Have I attempted to cover that up in any way? Not at all, as disclosed above. Have I ever claimed any interest in welding? Absolutely not. Does one's personal "scope of knowledge", as you so succinctly put it on another page, or the manner in which one comes across a page have any bearing on the topics editors can edit and opine on? None whatsoever. Hope that's clear enough.  Dei z  talk 23:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep This is a poor article, but the subject is notable. Miller are a commercial body easily large enough to meet WP:CORP (just from the stamp-collecting aspect of documenting big industrial players). Their real interest though is their product. Miller arc welders are ubiquitous throughout any USA sites where stick welding is done. These things are the Hoover of welding. Now, does anyone have the spare time to do the legwork on fixing this article? I certainly don't. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, which part of WP:CORP refers to "the stamp-collecting aspect of documenting big industrial players"? How about something which actually satisifes the guideline, such as primary coverage in multiple independent reliable sources?  Dei z  talk 15:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - the company and its product appear to garner coverage. There appears to be a minor mention of the company here, and there are product reviews here and here. Trudging through the search results are bit tedious but the two reviews already found would indicate that more are likely given teh large number of Google and Google news hits -- Whpq (talk) 15:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  14:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm not a welder, and I knew this company made arc welders. Gnews search gives a lot of promising hits -- article just needs some sourcing and editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabrictramp (talk • contribs)


 * 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.