Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nash Timbers

From 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-04-08 09:23Z

[edit] Nash Timbers

Nash Timbers (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)
Image:Logo nash-1-.gif (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (added by closing admin)

Flooring company. Wikipedia not a business directory. Does not meet WP:CORP. The "Greenpeace article" listed in the links contains one one-sentence quote from David Nash in a long article about other stuff; the other links are of no use. Herostratus 01:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

  • I as an architect created this page after a recent presentation from Nash Timbers (Continuing Professional Education - Accredited) to our architectural firm (Woods Bagot) on the correct use of timber products and the current Australian standards in the industry. I and many of my fellow colleagues were impressed by the information that the company put forward in a non biased or self promoting manner. After the presentation i was interested in doing a little background research on the company yet there was little available, I understand that Nash Timbers does presentations such as these on a daily basis to other industry figures (architects, interior designers, engineers and builders). For this reason i felt that it may be useful for others if they could easily access information on the company in the form of a wikipedia site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Onethreesix (talk • contribs) 02:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
    • Comment. I can understand that, but it's not really a compelling reason to keep the article. See WP:USEFUL. As noted in the nomination, Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a business directory. Mwelch 04:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Canley 02:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fails WP:CORP. Agree with nom - Aagtbdfoua 03:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable per WP:CORP. Mwelch 04:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete As above and a possible WP:COI issue as well as he asserted permission from the owner to use the logo. --Mattinbgn/ talk 06:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I have read WP:CORP and WP:COI and believe the article does not belong on wikipedia until correctly sourced, so I will not dispute the deletion of this page, though I still believe fellow industry figures may find this article of some use. Onethreesix
  • Revise I also believe this article is useful as it relates to my recent article about recycling timber, though I do feel it could be better sourced. Bandwagonman
  • Weak delete unless some quantitative sourced information is added about market share to show that the company is notable as a major supplier.DGG 21:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, as above, not really notable enough yet. Lankiveil 12:15, 5 April 2007 (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.