Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coolture
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:21, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Coolture
- Coolture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is not enough reliable source information for this corporation/company or its product vest to meet
WP:GNG source material for there to be a stand alone article on the company topic. Delete. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:37, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
- Keep I added in additional references that prove this meets the general notability guidelines. Dream Focus 13:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete- the sourcing for this article consists of nothing but a bunch of trivial name-drops and I can't find anything better. Reyk YO! 00:28, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete — I agree that ]
- Is this not significant coverage? [5] The news article also has a video of the television news coverage. Ample coverage is listed at [6]. [7] isn't as long but is entirely about this company. [8] is hidden behind a paywall but clearly covers it. Dream Focus 11:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- [9] is a promotional piece by the University of Buffalo because of their involvement. [10] is local news coverage. [11] doesn't look like a reliable source, it looks self published. [12] is local news coverage (see where it is marked local). These sources don't contribute strongly towards GNG as demonstrated by the stub. There isn't even much coverage of material given by these sources. talk) 18:01, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Local or not, that [13] counts as coverage. Coverage doesn't have to be nation wide. And bizjournals counts as reliable source also, they having proper editorial oversight and a professional staff and meeting all other requirements. That's why 8,218 Wikipedia articles reference them. [14] Dream Focus 19:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Local or not, that [13] counts as coverage. Coverage doesn't have to be nation wide. And
- [9] is a promotional piece by the University of Buffalo because of their involvement. [10] is local news coverage. [11] doesn't look like a reliable source, it looks self published. [12] is local news coverage (see where it is marked local). These sources don't contribute strongly towards GNG as demonstrated by the stub. There isn't even much coverage of material given by these sources.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Article has been improved and sources added since nomination. [15] Dream Focus 19:24, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ultimately, the AfD process refuses to fit a WP:COIN, but tried to fly too close to the sun when I listed the article at DYK to appear on the main page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:30, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Do the sources provided prove the Coolture company and cooling vest are notable enough to pass WP:GNG and thus have an article dedicated to them? That's is what AFD exist to determine, not the current state of the article. I believe listing how a company was founded, and why, is important. Dream Focus 16:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I limited the AfD request to focus on the topic of the article, which is the company. Otherwise, we could end up approving a product article by receive a company article. There is no coolture vest or coolture (vest) article so it's too early to make any decisions on that. Sorry for any confusions. That also means you can post a coolture vest/coolture (vest) article since this AfD does not address that topic. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:29, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no reason to make an article for the product, and the person who created the company, when all the information goes well together on one page. Dream Focus 18:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Do the sources provided prove the Coolture company and cooling vest are notable enough to pass
- Ultimately, the AfD process refuses to fit a
- Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 04:40, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Dream Focus 09:40, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- delete No significant coverage of the company, as Uzma pointed out. I would say the product isn't notable either, but I'll save it for the other AfD. talk) 16:31, 8 October 2012 (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.