Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FCS Control Systems

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. Some sort of Merge seems appropriate here, given the three articles, but discussions are ongoing. Black Kite 11:05, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FCS Control Systems

No claim of notability. Ownership by notable companies does not confer notability on a subsidiary. References cited prove that it's a real company with owners and business, but don't actually cover the company itself in detail--contract awards are not "significant coverage" of the company awarded the contract. Jane's is meant to be a comprehensive compendium, which doesn't limit its lists to notable entries, so its existence doesn't demonstrate notability either.

Bongo matic 00:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page because it equally does not merit spearate coverage ~~(and seems likely to have been created in response to this AfD nomination)~~ (misread "October 9" as "November 9" in history):

Recommendation: Merge contents of both of them into Moog Inc. Please see the merger discussion.

second article added at 06:58, 9 November 2008 by Bongomatic

Delete--I agree. The sources are quite minimal and prove really the existence of a company and its product, and one notice (in the middle of a bloated list of awards and other news) of a small award. And without those meager sources, the article is really just an ad. Drmies (talk) 05:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the new name Moog FCS 70.55.86.100 (talk) 06:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nominator seems to not check histories, his/her claim about the creation of the Moog article is wrong, since it's existed for a month already. 70.55.86.100 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 09:09, 9 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Keep notability established the usual way. No need to make an exception just because it's a commercial enterprise. Wily D 15:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge To Moog Inc. Well, I think that was the page. Hell, I'm tired. Goodnight. But merge them. I think... ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 05:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don't know where the nominator gets the idea that Jane's doesn't count as a reliable source for notability purposes - the existence of such a source is what counts, not the motives of its publisher. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Chicago White Pages, IMDB, Allmusic, the Schwann catalog are all reliable sources, independent of the subjects of almost all of their entries. That doesn't mean that inclusion of coverage therein makes something notable. Generally, the notability guideline is intended to capture whether editorial judgments on the notability of subjects have been made by other editors. Inclusion in any publication whose goal is to be an exhaustive list of items of a particular category does not demonstrate such a judgment. Bongo matic 23:45, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete FCS Control Systems and merge content into Moog FCS. The references (including Jane's) relate to Moog FCS, not the company formerly known as FCS Control Systems. So too does most of the article content - the list of applications is actually Moog FCS's applications lists and is duplicated in that article. The "Industrial Controls" section even states the motion controls are provided by Moog FCS and not this former organisation. The company formerly known as FCS Control Systems fails the notability guideline as it has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources (unlike Moog FCS, which potentially has). Euryalus (talk) 05:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment; sorry, if we are to merge content then the source page cannot be deleted since the history must be preserved for GFDL reasons. Smile a While (talk) 02:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect FCS Control Systems to Moog FCS; Keep Moog FCS. Since this is essentially the same company, we don't need two pages but the combined company is notable. Smile a While (talk) 02:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:N, and a coverage is Janes is quite significant for sourcing. AFD should not be used to expedite or publixize merge discussions; merge proposal may still be discussed by interested editors on the article talk pages after this article is kept at AFD. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 02:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.