Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waukesha Bearings 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   merge to Dover Corporation. Stifle (talk) 17:56, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Waukesha Bearings Corporation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Minor manufacturing firm (now division of notable large firm) - neither evidence nor assertion of non-existent notability. Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  12:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm disappointed that the COI editor User:BearingTechnology has continued to edit the page, despite my providing straightforward instructions on the article's Talk page and on BearingTechnology's Talk page on how to disclose, use Talk and ask for feedback. I note that some of his additions are useful, but "gives machines a lower cost of ownership and reduced leakage gap" we could have done without. And such promotionalism makes me lean towards deleting on the basis of WP:NOT, but I believe the article as a whole is adequately neutral and well-sourced to keep, if more sources are found to establish notability. I note that more sources have been added, but I think it still needs a few more sources that cover the company in greater depth and are from more credible sources to meet the bar. CorporateM (Talk) 15:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I am providing the acticle with an overview of the services and what they are provided for. The industry is one that is often misunderstood and it is one that can be better clarified in several ways. This is article is intended to provide an informative source and overview of a corporation in the industry, similar to what has been created for other organizations. Many of the articles on magnetic bearings, fluid bearings, etc. all have a direct connection to the Waukesha Bearings Corporation article, therefore it can serve as a resource for Wikipedia users seeking more in depth understanding. I am more than welcome to having others contribute, as I have a plethora of additional sources (from books, journals, websites, etc.). I am disappointed to see such critical feedback on an article that has just started to form. BearingTechnology (talk) 17:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Bearing, can you please provide the books, journals and websites you're referring to? CorporateM (Talk) 00:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * CorporateM, here are a number of resources listed below that give the company notability and, for those who are unaware of the industry, a more clear understanding of the contribution the products and services give to OEMs (Siemens, GE, Rolls Royce, Toshiba, Westinghouse, NAM-Shell, etc.) that produce important resources (such as oil and gas energy) for areas around the world.


 * (1)	http://books.google.com/books?id=nopKAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false I could not find the company mentioned in the book using the search function. CorporateM (Talk) 15:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (2)	http://www.ebearing.com/news2004/102601.htm ✅ These are both included in the article already. CorporateM (Talk) 15:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (3)	http://www.ebearing.com/news2001/news301.htm ✅ These are both included in the article already. CorporateM (Talk) 15:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (4)	http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2009/12/28/daily39.html ✅ Already included CorporateM (Talk) 15:33, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (5)	http://www.mt-online.com/february2010/inproseal-takes-it-one-part-at-a-time ✅ already included
 * (6)	http://www.jsonline.com/business/110849239.html ✅ This is a good source and one that I think improves the argument for keeping the article substantially. CorporateM (Talk) 15:48, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (7)	http://ir.fmctechnologies.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=280804 a press release CorporateM (Talk) 15:54, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (8)	http://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/10385/comment-the-marine-renewable-engineering-challenge/  Looks like an op-ed? Also not sure if it actually mentions the company. A CTRL F "Find" didn't turn anything up.
 * (9)	http://www.ingesfor.com/BA537/Cases/Case%209_1/case%209_1.pdf I downloaded the PDF and did a CTRL-F "Find" and nothing came up as far as mentioning the technology
 * (10)	http://www.waukbearing.com/en/about-us/engineering-and-technology/ This is just the company website and not a usable source for us
 * (11)	http://www.sipac.gov.cn/english/categoryreport/IndustriesAndEnterprises/201210/t20121026_175900.htm
 * (12)	http://www.waukbearing.com/en/about-us/news/?ID=18
 * (13)	http://www.ebearing.com/news2005/041101.htm
 * (14)	http://www.bearing.com.cn/dev/read_news.php?id=6890&type
 * (15)	http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/pearland/news/pearland-finds-higher-economic-fortune/article_3ac70fb5-a36e-5369-b8f0-a66b7e7389d3.html
 * (16)	http://turbolab.tamu.edu/articles/trc_members_list
 * (17)	http://www.generatortechnicalforum.org/html/industry/industry_challenges.htm
 * (18)	http://www.pump-zone.com/topics/bearings/attraction-magnetic-bearings
 * (19)	http://www.marineinsight.com/tech/main-engine/different-types-of-marine-propulsion-systems-used-in-the-shipping-world/
 * (20)	http://www.brighthubengineering.com/marine-engines-machinery/93979-marine-electrical-power-distribution/
 * (21)	http://cced.ces.uwex.edu/files/2012/08/N._EDGE_Langlade1.pdf
 * (22)	http://www.industrynet.com/listing/219495/waukesha-bearings
 * (23)	http://www.bmpcoe.org/bestpractices/pdf/inpro.pdf
 * (24)	http://www.chemicalprocessing.com/vendor-news/2013/inproseal-bearing-isolator-receives-ip66-rating/
 * (25)	http://offshoregroup.com/advantages-manufacturing-in-guaymas-and-empalme/
 * (26)	http://www.inpro-seal.com/en_US/about-us/company-profile/
 * (27)	http://books.google.com/books?id=b2Qsst8UBEYC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
 * (28)   http://www.flowserve.com/portal/site/fls/menuitem.3c9f4e703bfa49d43aa855108101a1ca/?vgnextoid=8b93938ce15d0210VgnVCM10000085101eacRCRD&vgnextfmt=default
 * (29)   http://www.chemicalprocessing.com/vendor-news/2013/inproseal-bearing-isolator-receives-ip66-rating/
 * (30)   http://www.dovercorporation.com/globalnavigation/about-dover/corporate-development  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BearingTechnology (talk • contribs) 13:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * B.T., you are conflating (possibly innocently) the importance of bearings and bearing technology, with the notability of a single firm. I also notice an unwholesome number of links to corporate websites which may be neither reliable nor impartial. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Orange Mike- Though I am not purposely conflating the importance, I am simply trying to contribute to the business sector of Wikipedia content. I am having difficulties understanding the difference between what is being created here and what has been created for the countless other businesses. With an understanding of the industry, I know that there are few companies in the industry due to the highly technical processes. John Crane Group is one of the others, which is represented on Wikipedia. With the creation other articles in the industry, it leaves Wikipedia users to understand the history, development and acquisitions associated with the industry. Many of the articles above are not necessarily corporate, but news articles from tubromachinery groups reporting on the advances of the industry and Waukesha Bearings Corporation's relation.BearingTechnology (talk) 19:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I noticed a discrepancy between two users User:Orangemike and User:CorporateM. Above, it was recommended that I stop editing the page. However, it was also noted that "Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion." on my talk page. I am willing to collaborate and hope to gain feedback on the discrepancy so I know the best way to handle this moving forward. BearingTechnology (talk) 13:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * In general our instructions are intended for regular, crowd-sourced, volunteer participants. WP:COI provides guidance specifically for marketing professionals, which varies drastically compared to the instructions provided to the site's editors. Anyways, I'll look through the sources and provide my own vote one way or another after review. CorporateM (Talk) 15:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I understand a bit more now and am interested in learning more as I am able to. Thank you. http://turbolab.tamu.edu/proc/turboproc/T32/t32-05.pdf This technical paper, by a bearing engineer not associated with the company, acknowledges that one of WBC's acquisitions (Glacier Metal Company) is the earliest user of the directed lubrication concept. http://www.magneticbearings.org/?page_id=1132 The International Symposium for Magnetic Bearings hall of fame page awards an engineer within the company that contributed to the development of magnetic bearings. BearingTechnology (talk) 17:54, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Bearing, do you think you could put together a couple sentences for the Dover page with citations like "In 1977, Dover acquired Waukesha Bearings Corporation,(source) a company that manufactured ___________,(source) for $XXX million.(source) Waukesha Bearings Corporation had also previously acquired a ______ company, ________, for $XXX million in 19XX(source) and a ____ company, ______, for $XXX million in 19XX.(source)" or something similar to that? CorporateM (Talk) 19:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * CorporateM, I added information about acquisitions to Dover's page. I found sources for the information as listed. Is that what you were suggesting? Unfortunately my Internet browser was not allowing me to use the citation template so they include the URL for now.BearingTechnology (talk) 16:42, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge Absent references for notability being added, I suggest merging with Dover Corporation. Capitalismojo (talk) 19:41, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge I don't have time to review all 30 sources provided, but from what I've seen most are re-written press releases, don't mention the company, are primary sources or don't cover the company in substantial depth. There are a couple exceptions and I see a couple acquisitions that were notable, but we only have 1-2 paragraphs of material that could be written using proper sources. Since the company was acquired by Dover Corporation in 1977, and we don't have enough sources to discuss its history before then, adding the information to the Dover page seems like the right place for it. This would be our normal approach when we write an article on a Fortune 500 company is to consolidate the history of the small companies it acquires there. The Dover page also gives me the impression that it was written by the company, so perhaps he/she can eventually share what they learn on the right way to participate with the mother ship. I'm happy to do some light coaching and assistance to make any appropriate edits on the Dover page. CorporateM (Talk) 16:02, 24 July 2013 (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.