Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nu-Venture


 * 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. Well the community deem it notable despite my objections but yep moving on... (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  00:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Nu-Venture

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As much as I absolutely hate to nominate this ... There's no evidence of any notability that I can find at all, Sadly a non notable bus company that Fails GNG. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  06:05, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:58, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 15:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - In spite of some derring-do adventures (blown off a cliff! saved the driver!), this bus company does not appear to be notable. LaMona (talk) 19:39, 17 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Nu-Venture is a notable bus operator, "one of the five main operators in Kent". Two global multi-nationals dominate the county, with the other three being second tier players, all around the same size, but with different territories. It's the same situation across most of the UK, at least in the profitable areas. Like all these 2nd tier outfits, Nu-Venture have a long established presence and a significant market share, particularly in the sensitive subsidised market. Nu-Venture also has/had an unusual fleet, making it more notable than the average operator. All this notability will be reflected in the coverage in proper sources - books, magazines, trade journals. Google is about as useful for assessing notability in niche topic likes this as Wikipedia is - take a look at Transport in Kent for example (or even the Kent article) - who knew that there's apparently not even a single notable bus operator in the whole of Kent? There's not a lot you can write about bus operators if all you're doing is aggregating press releases found on Google. If Wikipedia is aiming to be "the largest encyclopedia in history, both in terms of breadth and in terms of depth.", then operators like Nu-Venture are well within scope. Notforlackofeffort (talk) 10:01, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * - That's great and all but we need better sources for the article, If you can find more than what's there I would easily withdraw, Cheers, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  10:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Doubtful. Time. Willpower. Interest. All severely lacking. It's one thing to state the obvious, that the sources are out there, in the hope reason prevails, it's quite another to actually go get them. Notforlackofeffort (talk) 10:54, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per Notforlackofeffort. Much as I hate buses, The company is notable enough to sustain an article. Needing improvement is never a reason to delete an article. Mjroots (talk) 18:56, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * - "The company is notable enough to sustain an article" - Please tell me where there's notability here? ... And I have concerns over the notability not the article overall so saying "Needing improvement is never a reason to delete an article" is rather pointless but I assume you haven't even bothered reading my rationale above?. – Davey 2010  •  (talk)  19:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  18:15, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep As per the nutshell, wp:notability is that the topic has attracted the attention of the world at large over a period of time based on evidence.  No one can pretend that this is hoax attention.  Unscintillating (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I hate to badger here but where's the notability? The only attention it gets is from those in Kent and that's pretty much it .... ?, No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists isn't a reason for it to be kept, Other than a few minor news stories there's no verifiable evidence. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  23:49, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Where's the WP:BEFORE D1 evidence that it is not notable? You told me once before that you check Google images.  What did you find in this case?  Unscintillating (talk) 00:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I search ALOT more than Images ? .... Well I've somehow found 2 books so meh may aswell keep it since there's some notability. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  00:18, 25 August 2014 (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.