Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U.S. Corrugated


 * 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. Merger discussion can take place on the talk page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

U.S. Corrugated

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Non-notable company. All but two of the references are self-published. Albacore (talk) 22:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Just so that everyone is aware, there is a discussion about the possible paid advocacy involved in this article ongoing at AN/I.—Yutsi Talk/  Contributions  ( 偉特 ) 19:20, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The firm has a sufficiently large market share to be notable. The Bloomberg reference supports the notability sufficiently. "All but two references are internal" is not a criterion for deletion--it argues rather for inclusion that two of them are third party.  DGG ( talk ) 03:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - The company has multiple reliable sources and so satisfies notability. This went to AfD because people don't like paid editors and want to punish them. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 18:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep – The topic passes WP:GNG per:
 * New factory to bring more than 100 jobs to Lancaster | The Columbus Dispatch
 * KapStone acquiring U.S. Corrugated - Roanoke Rapids Daily Herald
 * "U.S. Corrugated Will Make 12 million Pizza Boxes Per Year for Donatos." PMQ Pizza Magazine.
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 22:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - The only reason not to keep this would be to merge it with Kapstone; from a quick look the article should be updated to reflect the new corporate parent. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 03:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge with Kapstone  its parent company it has acquired acquired with a section for U.S. Corrugated.The Company was called Four M Manufacturing in 1966, then Box USA from 1994  till 2006 when it became U.S. Corrugated and 2012 again it is being acquired by Kapstone and I doubt whether it was noteworthy under this name it was founded and known by another name Four M for the longest period.The sources and news is largely about the merger ,internal and except for news about an order or a factory being opened which is relatively less for  US company.As per WP:Otherstuffexists ,the argument is not that if a company merges that article should be merged in every case but feel it should be merged here.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, do not merge. The company itself is notable from the time of its independence. There's no precedent for deleting company articles when they get taken over, and it's a ridiculous precedent to set - we don't delete the articles on Wang Laboratories, Trans World Airlines or British Satellite Broadcasting just because they've now been absorbed by another corporation. I can't see how this is any different - the only issue is whether the pre-takeover company was noteworthy, and I think it's been clearly shown that it was. Mogism (talk) 14:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Mogism, I think you make an argument that's valid for big companies such as those you've cited. In this case, however, I think our readers are better served having one larger, more closely watched article; it's likely to be more reliable than 2 smaller articles about notable, but obscure organizations.-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:49, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Kapstone, its parent company. GiantSnowman 15:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep and do not merge per Mogism. What policy is there to support merging an article when  it get's taken over? Ryan Vesey  Review me!  15:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Kapstone, per Pharaoh of the Wizards.—Yutsi Talk/  Contributions  ( 偉特 ) 19:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Kapstone. Clearly notable. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep As per WP:N, notability is not temporary.  Also, AfD is not Articles for Merger, take it to talk.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:34, 13 July 2012 (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.