Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Morton Worldwide

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 no consensus; kept, but some notability is confirmed. `'mikka 01:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Morton Worldwide

promotional Tom Harrison ^Talk 12:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ unless reliable third-party references can be provided to show this company meets the WP:CORP notability guideline (which it may). Propaniac 17:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing vote to Neutral after looking a little closer. The article in its current form doesn't seem overly promotional in its tone, and despite the lack of third-party sources at this point, the company does seem adequately notable. Propaniac 17:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is OK on tone, but the subject of the article is NN. The film listed seems very NN itself, the other sources are either their corporate websites or directory information: Hoovers is very acceptable as a source of information, but not for proving N. The only possible feature is the 2004 award, but the page wouldn't open. Further, I do not know how notable these awards may be. DGG 00:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question I'm sorry if this is not my place to ask questions. I'm the keeper of the wiki entry at hand. I'm glad that the tone passes the test. But does Jack Morton Worldwide or the awards it has earned need to be known by the editors of wikipedia to be deemed noteworthy or notable? If the editors/general public know the Oscars, which resides w/n the wikipedia domain, we should ask ourselves why. Or what about general knowledge of the Olympics (which, coincidentally, was why Jack Morton Worldwide won the award of which we speak)? --JMorton 14:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTE for an explanation of how notability is defined. Basically, if the company or the awards can be shown to have received non-trivial coverage in reliable sources, it's notable. Propaniac 15:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-trivial? Since when has the Olympics been considered trivial? The agency produced the opening and closing ceremonies.--JMorton 19:21, 10 May 2007 (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.