Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plaxall


 * 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. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Plaxall

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

Article fails WP:NOTABILITY, WP:CORP, and WP:COI. Article was created by an WP:SPA account with no other edits other than related to Plaxall (apparantly Plaxall is his client). Was speedied twice under WP:CSD. google produces very little, asside from lawsuits. Has a few links but they seem to be merely trivial coverage or mentions. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. which is clearly noted in the notability guidelines. Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article. Hu12 (talk) 23:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note/clarification: The author of the article is the IT manager of the company. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Googling produces hundreds of websites. In fact only a single lawsuit is noted in which the ruling went in favor of the company. The company invented thermoforming and has been in existance for more than 70 years and as such the article has historical importance. — Cschiffner (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment Notability seems to rest on the apparent claim that Plaxall invented thermoforming. Do we have a source like Wiley's Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and Technology, rather than a local newspaper? --Boson (talk) 00:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Delete as per nom. Not notable Bardcom (talk) 00:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

If inventing thrmoforming isnt notable then what is? It seems as though wikipedia has lost its ability to grow. Not allowing articles in unless they are already published somewhere else just makes it a copycat. --70.107.249.106 (talk) 16:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC) — 70.107.249.106 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete. There is insufficient evidence of notability. There is a claim of notability based on the subject being the inventor of thermoforming but this does not seem to be widely known, let alone accepted, and there is also evidence that the subject of the article did not invent thermoforming. --Boson (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom, insufficient evidence of notability. The article claim that the subject was central to start of thermoforming appears to be contradicted by other sources. As the article's notability] hinges on that central claim, I support deletion. --- [[User:Barek|Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

KEEP The article states that it is commonly thought to hav been invented in modern form in the 1930's. The decade Plaxall was founded. No other "inventor" is offered.--70.107.249.106 (talk) 18:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC) — 70.107.249.106 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment: 70.107.249.106 has been reported as a suspected sockpuppet. See Suspected sock puppets/Cschiffner —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toddst1 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 11 March 2008


 * 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.