Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dolphin Surf Craft

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. Tone 09:53, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dolphin Surf Craft[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:ORGSIG. Other then the fact that the company exists there is no indication of any notability. I can't find any significant coverage other then what is already in the article. If they had invented the surf skis that they sell this would be different but they did not MarnetteD|Talk 02:33, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention that this started as a redirect to List of companies of Australia. I guess it could be returned to that but it isn't mentioned there and I don't know that the company is important enough for the redirect to exist. MarnetteD|Talk 02:44, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (formerly Everymorning) talk 03:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:ORGSIG and WP:GNG. I can't see anything much besides [1] which is behind a pay wall. Doctorhawkes (talk) 03:48, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:44, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep True there is not a lot on them but there are these SLSNSW , a supplier, and a manufacturing journal. I suggest that an organisation that is/was a preferred supplier of life saving equipment to a peak public safety body makes them potentially notable, that they do/did, apparently, have a leading edge on other manufacturers, and get into a much broader industry journal make them potentially notable. Aoziwe (talk) 11:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of those references meet the criteria for establishing notability, including those noted above by Aoziwe. Sure, they show the company exists, but there's no indications as to why the company is notable. References fail WP:ORGIND, topic fails GNG and WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:55, 20 September 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.