Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rivian Automotive


 * 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   no consensus.  Sandstein  05:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Rivian Automotive

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete. 20 employees? Seems more like WP:SPAM. Two refs are from blog. Only one from one article in local paper. Student7 (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep (article creator); I was unaware of a policy regarding the number of employees needed to have an article. There's plenty of sources available, enought to meet WP:NCORP, I think there's enough "reliable, independent secondary sources" available for this to be have an article.  The blog used is a perfectly reliable one, it's owned by AOL and has editorial oversight. I also object to the characterization of this as spam, you have no proof of that and it's an unfounded and unreasonable accusation. C628 (talk) 23:24, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Question. Are you then, associated with the firm? Student7 (talk) 12:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not. What possible grounds do you have to claim that I am? C628 (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Posturing aside, Autoblog.com is not a "blog" in the traditional sense, which composes both of Student7's concerns. They would appear to be a reliable source.  Dennis Brown (talk) 20:22, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment But it is a media that essentially mindlessly broadcasts any public relations handouts it gets, typical of most industry pubs. We can be sure that the accuracy of what the Rivian handout said, compared to what the webpage said, was accurate. Note that halfway down the page, the blog says "Source Avera Motors." (That is honest!) But not that a neutral source "decided" that Rivian/Avera was important enough and should therefore be covered. Student7 (talk) 19:06, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 06:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete - WP:GNG requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", that does not exist, therefore this should be deleted until such coverage exists. Mtking (talk) 11:11, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep The company is new and small but that is meaningless to meet wp:n. Some creative searching finds a little coverage, although most of the coverage is about the company changing their name.  What is left is mild coverage (including Hyundai suing them over their Avera model name).  The total notability (at a glance) is borderline but the article is only two days old, hasn't had much time to develop.  Granted, at this time, the lawsuit with Hyundai appears to be getting more coverage than the company itself.  Dennis Brown (talk) 11:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I see no compelling reason for a excption to the rules on this, when they produce and actual sell a car then look at it again, the world is full of startup compaines that talk big but fail to deliver. Mtking (talk) 08:58, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Sources look fine to me. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:06, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment the quality of the sources is not the issue, the lack of "significant coverage" is however. One is a local paper, the other two are from the same blog. Mtking (talk) 08:58, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Just a tiny company folks. Most convenience stores are larger. Are we going to list all of them? Individually? And, so far, your local convenience store has had more of an impact on society. Student7 (talk) 13:29, 5 April 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.