Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bristol Classic Boat 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. —Tom Morris (talk) 09:45, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bristol Classic Boat Company

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No verifiable evidence provided demonstrating significant coverage of the company in reliable sources independent of it per WP:General notability guidelines and WP:CORP. One of the two references is from the company website (and therefore not independent); the other contains only an incidental mention of the company name. Tagged for notability since December 2007. Propose Delete. I don't have access to Nexis, but take Jezhotwells' word for it that the company appears notable based on the sources he/she has reviewed and cited. I withdraw the nomination. Propose Speedy Keep. --DGaw (talk) 04:43, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not a major boatbuilder, but I'd say that their work on building the Matthew replica is sufficient. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have added some cites from the Evening Post which support the statements in the article. I feel it meets the WP:GNG. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:52, 3 December 2011 (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.