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.
Promotional, unreferenced since its creation ten years ago, reads like a press release,
WP:BEFORE shows little actual third-party coverage to meet
WP:CORP. No reasonable prospects of the article's problems being fixed organically. PROD removed with no effort to fix problems.
David Gerard (
talk)
23:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep important historic company. there will be other references. Some of the currentmaterial should be reduced to eliminate the promotionalism /. DGG (
talk )
01:05, 4 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment: I added a reference to a book where a paragraph discusses the company's changing manufacture approach. I was tempted to
WP:TNT the article down to only the couple of sentences which are supported by that reference, but left it for the time being in case others can find references to support the remaining claims and also render the text encyclopaedic. I don't regard the paragraph in the Bryson article, where the firm serves just as an example of wider changes, as sufficient for
WP:NCORP though.
AllyD (
talk)
08:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep clearly a keep as they are royal warranted, well known manufacturer (in UK at least) who produced cutlery for titanic and currently UK parliament (see the star article) and as per above this just needs re-creating and referenced — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2A02:C7D:C5F6:2700:DCBF:59BE:B586:1F35 (
talk)
06:59, 8 November 2018 (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.
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.
Promotional, unreferenced since its creation ten years ago, reads like a press release,
WP:BEFORE shows little actual third-party coverage to meet
WP:CORP. No reasonable prospects of the article's problems being fixed organically. PROD removed with no effort to fix problems.
David Gerard (
talk)
23:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep important historic company. there will be other references. Some of the currentmaterial should be reduced to eliminate the promotionalism /. DGG (
talk )
01:05, 4 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment: I added a reference to a book where a paragraph discusses the company's changing manufacture approach. I was tempted to
WP:TNT the article down to only the couple of sentences which are supported by that reference, but left it for the time being in case others can find references to support the remaining claims and also render the text encyclopaedic. I don't regard the paragraph in the Bryson article, where the firm serves just as an example of wider changes, as sufficient for
WP:NCORP though.
AllyD (
talk)
08:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep clearly a keep as they are royal warranted, well known manufacturer (in UK at least) who produced cutlery for titanic and currently UK parliament (see the star article) and as per above this just needs re-creating and referenced — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2A02:C7D:C5F6:2700:DCBF:59BE:B586:1F35 (
talk)
06:59, 8 November 2018 (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.