Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trufab (UK) (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 delete. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 19:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Trufab (UK)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of any notability: routine listing plus one small locally-reported H&S incident. AfD 10 years ago closed as "No consensus", but perhaps it's time to delete it now. Pam D  23:13, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Multiple searches (Highbeam, Guardian, Google) are not providing evidence of notability for the Rochdale-based firm. (Note there are others of similar name worldwide.) Reviewing the key argument from the 2005 AfD, I don't see a routine HSE case as evidence that a firm is notable; much more is needed for WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as No evidence of any notability fials gng. – Davey 2010 Talk
 * Delete - searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage to show that it passes WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH.  Onel 5969  TT me 17:10, 14 December 2015 (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.