Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ram Mounts

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. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ram Mounts

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

Doesn't seem to satisfy WP:COMPANY. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There are some references covering the products ([1], [2], [3], [4]) in what appear to be industry-related websites. Might be reprints of press releases, and even if not, there may be a lack of independence. -- RM 14:35, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: - the products have been reviewed in many publications, so they seem to be notable, while the company doesn't seem to be. - Ahunt (talk) 23:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh, yes of course, I don't know what I was thinking. delete. -- RM 14:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the company doesn't seem to make WP:GNG. - Ahunt (talk) 23:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nothing at all convincing for the necessary notability improvements. SwisterTwister talk 06:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable. Certainly the article needs improvement but the product is certainly notable. Anybody attaching GPS, phone, tablets, fishfinders, depth indicators etc etc to motorcycles, aircraft cockpits, and to boats, etc etc, very likely will be familiar with Ram Mounts - one of the best known ways of securely attaching portable electronic equipment to vehicles. Please don't delete because the article needs work. Help improve the article. I know this is by itself not a compelling argument, but it does carry some weight: there are many many articles at WP on devices which do NOT lead their market sector. Paul Beardsell (talk) 00:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Once again if the products are notable then there should be an article about the products, but this article is about the company, and it seems to not be notable. - Ahunt (talk) 01:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with what others have said. The products themselves seem to be notable enough for an article, but this is about the company itself, which has been covered by few reliable, independent sources. Omni Flames ^{let's talk about it} 10:32, 27 April 2016 (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.