Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Appraisal

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A consulting company but no evidence of notability is offered. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 06:47, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — subject is quite notable. Company history is counting over 100 yrs and i was able to find significant coverage of the company (not the term) on Google Books, News and even Scholar. Article is in need of bigger edits to fulfill the WP requirements but the subject is notable enough to keep it on WP. — Zhernovoi (talk) 16:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence of notability. ScottyBerg (talk) 16:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete The bar for private companies should be set differently than it is for biographies or studies of political or historical topics. This one fails the sniff test, no significant information imparted and a little bit of hornblowing in a poorly-written stub. Carrite (talk) 17:12, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Click on the Google news link at the top of the AFD and you get 3,090 results. Reading through some, its the company in question mentioned there. The oldest news search result is over a hundred years ago! When you been making news for more than a century, you are notable. Dream Focus 06:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As the author of the article, I am obviously biased. However, do consider that that company employs more than 1,000 people in 60 locations worldwide. I am not aware of specific inclusion criteria for the English Wikipedia, but e.g. in the German Wikipedia, this is a clear keeper (the limits are at least 1,000 employees or 20 locations worldwide, only one of which must be met). Consistently, the German article has been around for awhile. -- Sigi fikanz (talk) 22:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]