Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New York Crane & Equipment


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:05, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

New York Crane &
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

The article was nominated for deletion in a multiple nomination at Articles for deletion/March 2008 Manhattan construction crane collapse, with the reason "I am also nominating the following related pages because they are two agencies that have no notability other than their involvement in the crane collapse (searching them on any search engine only comes up with their websites, yellow pages, or articles related to the accident". It was closed as "redirect", but I'm relisting this as it's unclear from the discussion whether the comments also apply to this article. My opinion is that it should be deleted unless better sources can be found - there's information about two accidents involving the company's cranes, and charges in connection with these - most recently "Crane Owner Is Cleared of All Charges in Fatal Collapse", but this is insufficient material for an article and the the company name is unsuitable as a redirect due to neutrality and only distant connection to the eventual target article. Peter&#160;James (talk) 23:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - There appears to be little coverage about the company aside from the incidents. Google News archives results appeared to almost all about the incidents or related. It is not surprising, considering that any news coverage this company would receive would be either incidents or their work. SwisterTwister   talk  01:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Coverage seems mostly related to a single incident, but I don't know of a corporate version of BLP1E.  Considering that, the multiple sources (even about the same incident) seem to technically pass GNG. -- No  unique  names  04:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - I'm with Nouniquenames; this really is a case of CORP-1E (or something?). We had something similar with Open Range Communications (see AfD here) which was the subject of an AfD because it was only notable (arguably) for one event - its own bankruptcy. It was kept. But there certainly is plenty of "coverage" if we can get past that question. Stalwart 111  (talk) 05:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 15:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 15:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator and SwisterTwister's comment and my reason in the first nomination. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 19:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. If something is notable for only one or two things that briefly happened and then went away, it's best to let it settle into the dusty archives of the internet. That's the policy and I'm sticking to it. Vcessayist (talk) 23:57, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 04:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete An accident or two do not make for notability.--Charles (talk) 10:09, 10 October 2012 (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.