Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aigle (company)

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 keep. Punkmorten 08:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aigle (company)

Aigle (company) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This article makes no attempt at making an assertion of notability other than it has been around since 1853. The label is also privately held, & I think it may be a COI article, but I can't be sure. Other than the label's own site, I don't see any refs or sources. So because of this, I'm listing it here for deletion... Thanks, Spawn Man 00:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Aigle is a pretty common brand. However, I don't think the company (which should be named Aigle S.A.) meets (or met) WP:CORP. Ten minutes playing with the Euronext site is quite enough, and I couldn't find that AGL was ever a part of any of the Euronext/CAC indexes. It is ultimately owned by de:Maus Frères Holding (fr:Maus Frères Holding is spammy: "En avant vers demain!" and perhaps a copyvio, although Google says not), a notablish private holding company, majority owners of Aigle, Lacoste, and other well-known brands. On the whole, I'd be happier with a smerge with Maus Frères Holding, only that's not written yet. I'll have a go at translating the French article and de-spamming it later this week. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 00:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, listing on fr.wikipedia.org gives some kind of notability. Some subjects are hard to verify if you do not live in the state of origin. Tulkolahten 00:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I'm inclined to think just about any company with more than 150+ years of history should be able to fill out an article. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Definitely notable. Their "about us" on their website might be helpful in beefing up the article: [1]. Gzkn 01:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Article isn't well-developed but topic is notable. TSO1D 01:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Most companies are privately held; that doens't make them non-notable. The French Wikipedia article is more complete. --Oakshade 02:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per obvious notability. Sharkface217 04:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep: Being on French Wikipedia makes it notable as above.--Meno25 06:51, 5 December 2006 (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.