Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krekel van der Woerd Wouterse

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 redirect to Deloitte. And mention briefly there. Sandstein 16:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Krekel van der Woerd Wouterse[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)

Unreferenced since 2006, fails WP:PROMO, WP:CORP, no corresponding NL Wiki article to look at for potential references. My WP:BEFORE found lots of studies by them, but no significant coverage of them. FOARP (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is very notable. See for example: Veel bedrijven hebben een goede loods nodig. Algemeen Dagblad, 08-04-1983. Via Delpher, 08-01-2022. gidonb (talk) 00:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi gidonb, thanks for responding. Please correct me if I am wrong, but this appears to be an interview with G. Prins, the director of KvdWW, and interviews are not independent coverage. We need non-interview articles profiling the company. They should also be a pass for the audience requirements of WP:CORP. FOARP (talk) 11:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. There are more interviews and tons of coverage of the company's research. Judging by the companies and economic branches affected, this was an extremely impactful organization. But rules are rules. In this case use the following sources for a mention in the Deloitte article, where the acquisition is missing.

Bedrijfsadviseurs gaan samen. De Tĳd, 23-06-1971, p. 10. Via Delpher, 09-01-2022.

KWW dochter. Het Vrĳe Volk, 23-10-1969, p. 17. Via Delpher, 09-01-2022.

I.e. just merge into Deloitte. For this we will also need a reference for the acquisition.Here. gidonb (talk) 19:02, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 20:01, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The coverage in the above links is brief, WP:MILL/routine-type coverage of the purchase of KWW by Deloitte that does not rise to the level of significant coverage under WP:CORP. KWW was a small firm in relation to Deloitte and would be out of proportion in the Deloitte article. FOARP (talk) 14:20, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The sources and the importance of this company are sufficient for a mention and redirect, which bundles as a highly selective merge. gidonb (talk) 14:08, 27 January 2022 (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.