Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Worsley Works

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 of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. Although the notvote-counters should note that Gwernol has notvoted twice, the points made by the keepers are enough to mean that a numeric two-thirds isn't enough here. I don't think the present version is a copyvio; at least, Google doesn't pick it up. -Splash^talk 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Worsley Works

Spam page eLNuko 10:22, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as spam. --Terence Ong (恭喜发财) 10:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:CORP, possibly linkspam and also copyvio of their website Kcordina 10:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep an article about a company isn't necessarily an advertisement, it all depends how notable the company is. From front google hits it seems to be notable in their field at least. Elfguy 14:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• How does this page offend when you can have a page about McDonald's
• Keep I agree with Elfguy, this company is notable in their field: they are a significant supplier of kits to model railway builders. The page does need work and it was apparently added by the owner of the company, but I believe it is better for the Wiki community to improve this page than simply delete it. Worsley Works are a major kit manufacturer and deserve an entry. Gwernol 16:14, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete Seems to be known among model train enthusaists, but does not, at least to my limited searching, seem to stand out more than any of the other modelers. Needs to show more evidence of notability. Note: Just because the author of an article has much to do with that article (be it about the person or their company) does not automatically make it vanity; just 94.28% of the time. Avi 21:03, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep A couple more points (sorry): Worsley Works have been written up in several of the modeling journals (for example, "Sixteen Millimetres Today" and "Railway Modeller", I can dig out specific issues if required) so clearly do meet the criteria of WP:CORP. Second if we want to be encyclopedic then I'd suggest we do want to include manufacturers like Worsley and others of note. In fact that's what I intend to do (given time...) from the list at the end of 16_mm_scale.

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.