Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Aaron Ltd.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:00, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

David Aaron Ltd.[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)

Poorly-referenced promo piece on a non-notable company. The sources cited consist of the company's own website (closely paraphrased, in part), one incidental mention in a trade mag, and a few admittedly-RS sources but which don't mention the company at all or only in passing. BEFORE search finds nothing beyond the usual social media and company listings etc. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT by some margin. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning Keep The article is indeed poor, but the subject, a leading dealer in its field for over a century, is probably notable. That they have their own short page on the British Museum website suggests so. As usual (deep sigh) the search term in the template only catches some mentions. "David Aaron Gallery" and ""David Aaron" dealer" produce more. Johnbod (talk) 22:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
RE the British Museum entry, that refers to the Aaron Gallery, which is not the same entity as David Aaron's newer business on Berkeley Square, the subject of this article. Notability is not inherited.

RE searching, I tried different combinations of 'David Aaron' plus something, because I didn't think 'David Aaron Ltd.' was particularly useful. If someone can produce better results, feel free to add, of course. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:13, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
According to https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09435505 DAVID AARON LIMITED was incorporated on 12 February 2015. Vexations (talk) 11:56, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Businesses set up new entities all the time. The (probably COI) article & the subject's website take the business back to the original foundation, & one of the Antiques Trade Gazette pieces says the new address was part of the same business; both are on Berkeley Sq. But "The Aaron Gallery" is now on New Bond Street (very close by) after a split some decades ago. I think the article should be rename to "Aaron Gallery" and cover all the permutations. Johnbod (talk) 14:47, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Based on off-wiki, public, easy to find evidence that I won't link to because it might be considered outing, I am certain that the creator of the article has a COI to declare. Vexations (talk) 15:57, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:11, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:11, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:11, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:11, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am unable to find significant sources about the gallery. I do find it listed in various lists of galleries but these are more like phone book entries than anything else. I don't find the fact that they have an entry on the British Museum site as a gallery to be worthy of an article here. The best source is the NYT article and that is not much more than a mention. I removed two references that did not mention the gallery, and there is still information in the article that I can't verify. Lamona (talk) 04:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is no significant coverwage in independent, reliable sources. The yorkshirepost only has The museum acquired the collection from previous owner David Aaron as a result of donations from American donor Richard Beleson, individual donors and funding through Art Fund. and Reyahn King, chief executive of York Museums Trust, said: “On behalf of York Museums Trust, I am incredibly grateful to Richard Beleson, Art Fund, the other individual donors and David Aaron, who have made the purchase of this incredible hoard possible.” The NYT has only quotes from the gallery itself and the antiquestradegazette is the kind of trade publication that WP:ORGIND says must be used with great care. I'll note that https://davidaaron.com/press/ lists 30 articles in which they are mentioned, but none of those are significant coverage of the subject either. Vexations (talk) 12:31, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am also unable to locate any references that meet NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:36, 10 April 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.