Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armstrong Audio

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:48, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Armstrong Audio[edit]

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

I would've let this article be if it wasn't that it needs more sources but all my searches found nothing good aside from this and this (the latter is a few business listings from the 1950s and '60s). Given its age, sources may not be easily accessible but there certainly would've been something (especially if it was widespread in the 1960s and '70s as the article says or especially something of its demise). SwisterTwister talk 05:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 01:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 01:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 01:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Hike The Monicas (talk) 16:46, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

UncertainIt will be necessary to check reviews for this period, and they won't be online. DGG ( talk ) 21:43, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - They look to have been a big frigging deal back in the Australian music scene in the 70s (yes, that's an advertisement, but I don't see any indication that they're lying), but that's pretty hard to find more information about. I'm inclined to trim the article down and maybe keep working on it. I have mixed feelings on this one... which leans to a 'keep' at least for now. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, adding to the confusion, it looks like the term 'Armstrong Audio' as a shortening is used both for the Armstrong Studios company and the company at issue here. The two don't seem to be connected, but I'm not sure. That's frustrating. To top that off, it looks like there's even another 'Armstrong Audio' project that surfaced in the U.S! CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see snippets of things about what I believe is the original British company back in the 60s, but none of it really is availible. I guess I'm going now with Neutral CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 05:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment' I've contacted the man who keeps the website and has archives on this topic.[1] He informs me that he does have reviews and other documentation on the subject and would like to see this article sustained. He also informs me that he has a life and won't be able to drop everything to update his website/Wikipedia. I've offered to help, and let him know that the references do not initially need to be online. I've also offered to help with formatting the refs/mentoring, so I will refrain from voting. 009o9 (talk) 18:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a "Product reviews" section. A list reviews that does/did exist was sent to me. The curator of this information (in the UK) is researching his options, copyright etc. before posting reproductions of the reviews on his website. 009o9 (talk) 01:15, 6 September 2015 (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.