Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ramsay Corporation


 * 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. &mdash;Cryptic 22:10, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Ramsay Corporation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article fails to meet notability requirements, and a further search yields no citations or references of value. Transmissionelement (talk) 21:52, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs)  23:22, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs)  23:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. The awards from Plant Engineering are enough to establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:27, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The Plant Engineering award is not sufficient, including for reason there is no in-depth coverage.  The Plant Engineering link about the company (separate from listing it in an list of companies receiving awards) is merely this short blurb about the firm.  Some coverage of the company in independent reliable sources is needed.  Note the article (and the firm's own website) could be a bit clearer about what "tests" are provided.  They are not medical lab tests.  They are not tests of manufacturing plant machines' efficiency.  They are not tests of product quality.  Apparently the small firm puts together questions for on-line educational-type testing of manufacturing workers, about, well, what I am not sure.  Whether a person is well-enough informed to operate a specific piece of equipment?  I dunno.  -- do  ncr  am  15:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * In 2007 Ramsay Corporation won the overall "Grand Award", which was for receiving the most votes of any product in any category, and in 2012 it got the Bronze/3rd prize in "Productivity & Training" category. Per the rules, presumably same as rules for the most recent Plant Engineering annual award program, only new products are eligible to be nominated.  Ramsay itself had to pay a fee like $495 self-nominate its products and to be put onto ballot, then online invitations to vote were sent to Plant Engineering magazine subscribers by email and also some notice was given online.  The winners get good publicity in the announcement of winners.  However, that does not seem impressive.  Maybe it was only 10 people voting, for all products, and Ramsay got 2 votes.  Subscribers might be interested in reading about new products, but why subscribers would be interested in voting is not clear to me, besides subscribers who could vote for a product of their own company.  Certainly voters would not be a random sample;  voters would not be informed about all products;  vote-stacking is conceivable;  there is no assertion that any panel of experts has reviewed products and found one to be the besst.  Wikipedia does have an article about Plant Engineering magazine but no coverage there of its annual awards;  quick searching by me finds no independent coverage about the awards program itself.  Some past winners of awards proclaim their winning (e.g. this CooperIndustries webpage describing the awards as "prestigious" and listing their receipt of awards in 3 categories in 2013) but that is not independent.  So the award itself seems not wikipedia-notable, and a manufacturer is not wikipedia-notable for having won the award. -- do  ncr  am  22:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * For software products, the rules are that software can be deemed a new product if there is a "major" upgrade. Apparently the major upgrade for Ramsay Corporation's software in 2012 was that it randomized the items in its multiple choice questions, or it randomized the questions, in online tests.  And in 2014, the apparent upgrade is that it offers tests now for "Entry Level Maintenance Workers".  Doesn't seem important to me. -- do  ncr  am  22:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Comment. Ramsay Corporation has one of just 3 accepted nominations in the Productivity & Training category in current voting for 2014 Plant Engineering awards, and will surely win Gold, Silver or Bronze.  It's likely there were only 3 candidates in 2012 when it won Bronze.  It appears to have been the only nomination in an unnamed category, or one of only two in "Training/Education Products" category in 2007, while every other category had 3 or more nominees, so it would not be surprising for it to get more votes than any other product (as votes in all other categories would be split across more options).  Also voting for 2014 Plant Engineering awards is now open (until Jan 9, 2015) at this open website.  I just voted;  anyone can, as many times as they want, presumably entering different names and email addresses.  Perhaps PE staff will evaluate my vote and some others as not eligible (and my vote should not be eligible, as i am not a subscriber to the magazine), but perhaps they will not.  Anyhow, having won an award in this kind of system does not establish notability for an encyclopedia.  I voted "Delete" above. -- do  ncr  am  22:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:58, 4 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 15:31, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete In the circumstances mentioned the award is not significant.  DGG ( talk ) 16:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * delete the award doesn't seem like anything notable, and neither does the company Deunanknute (talk) 06:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.