Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TNT Fireworks
Appearance
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- TNT Fireworks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
not notable according to no reliable sources and WP:NCORP. Facebook source should be deleted. Tls9-me (talk) 08:32, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Alabama. Shellwood (talk) 09:14, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Only news articles found are company stores telling people how to handle fireworks safely. Nothing for GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 15:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I have added more sources to the article and removed the Facebook one. DarkNight0917 (talk) 21:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep After reviewing DarkNight0917's edits, I'd say the article passes WP:GNG. I also fixed up two links that did not lead to where they intended. Conyo14 (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Passes WP:GNG after recent edits. Grahaml35 (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
- keep per improvements to article WP:HEY. ResonantDistortion 17:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 † edits 03:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- Weak delete. I'm not seeing sources that meet WP:SIRS for WP:NCORP. Given the age of the company it's likely there are archives of newspapers to hunt through, but right now it's hard to guarantee NPOV. —siroχo 10:25, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. I'm unable to locate any reference that meet NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing++ 21:07, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Tricky per both sides above, but I think it is better cleaned up than deleted. Chamaemelum (talk) 01:44, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- Comment None of the Keep !voters have pointed to any references that meet NCORP criteria for establishing notability, just WP:VAGUEWAVEs. HighKing++ 14:21, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- I decided to show a source analysis. The only thing the sources don't detail is the vast history of the company, something that would increase its notability. However I feel this table shows justification of WP:GNG. That being said, a citation is probably required for the start date of this company. It's been around a very long time. Conyo14 (talk) 23:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I do not believe any of the 5 "green" sources listed in the table as counting toward GNG satisfy WP:SIRS for WP:CORP. (My !vote above remains as is.)
- —siroχo 02:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I agree and pretty obviously too. For example this in tucson.com about the county getting sued over its bad on fireworks has two mentions-in-passing of the company. It has zero in-depth information about the company and fails WP:CORPDEPTH. One of these days I'm gonna do a source table for GNG/NCORP so that we can explicitly evaluate CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. HighKing++ 21:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Very well prepared and presented source analysis table, which gives a clear indication that that article is non-notable. I can't see any definition in the references that would indicate it was notable. Woeful sources really Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creepTalk 11:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
- Comment If someone here wants to take stewardship of it to avoid backdoor deletion, I think there's a promising case for draftifying here. This is an old company and there will very likely be analog sources. We just can't really guarantee NPOV without any at all. —siroχo 11:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 02:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:NCORP, the sources mentioned above don't meet the criteria, unless good analogue sources can be found. --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 14:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)