Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pacific Bearing Corp (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Article may need a bit of cleanup, but the sources indicate notability within the field. m.o.p 16:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Pacific Bearing Corp
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This was deleted in AFD 1 which had a relatively low turnout for a lack of sourcing but some sources have now been provided. Personally I don't think they cut the mustard but justice requires wider evaluation. Hence I have undeleted and relisted this for further discussion. The sources provided are:-
 * http://www.designnews.com/info/1740-Golden_Mousetrap_Finalists.php - this links shows that PBC Linear was selected as having one of the most innovative products (in its category) in 2009. There is a longer article to go along with this list, but I thought this would suffice for this purpose.  Voting is done by an editorial board
 * http://www.designworldonline.com/articles/5114/21/PBC-Linear-Wins-Design-World-s-2009-Leadership-in-Engineering-Contest.aspx - This link shows that PBC won an annual award for "Leadership in Engineering". Voting is done by the subscribers of the magazine. (PBC received honorable mention in 2010 and is currently leading 2011)
 * http://www.hononegahlions.com/PDFs/HYSA%20Info%20Page%20%28Website%29%2012-21-05.pdf - this link details some of the company's involvement and contributions to the local community Spartaz Humbug! 12:22, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak delete - I'd say that sources 1 and 3 definitely don't prove notability. Source 2 is borderline, if there were other borderline sources with it, then I could see a case for notability, but with this one alone, I don't think it cuts it. Wizard191 (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I've added a few more sources. Per Spartaz, this article is open for a 7 day review and I intend to add more content (as time/work permits). I do intend to add more Notable content within the week.  Please reserve any "Delete" recommendations until the conclusion of the review period. - Schbrownie (talk) 14:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * More sources/content has been added to this article. Realizing that this is still a "work in progress", there should at least be enough information to obtain a "no-delete".  Schbrownie (talk) 15:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  —  Meph talk 16:45, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep seems to be a notable company. --rogerd (talk) 22:45, 28 June 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.