Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dyno-Rod

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 keep. (non-admin closure) — Yash^talk stalk 05:33, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dyno-Rod[edit]

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

As far as I can tell, this company doesn't meet WP:NCORP. Mikeblas (talk) 15:32, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This company is probably the biggest plumbing company in the UK to my knowledge, the Prime Minister actually mentioned them in a speech (“If there are things that are stopping you from doing more, think of me as a giant Dyno-Rod,”) article looks a bit like advertisement but I think it should pass WP:GNG per these sources: [1] [2] [3] [4]. These are all national sources, the BBC, The Independent and The Guardian. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 16:05, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, you're kidding, right? They really are a very well-known, well-established and successful company with an excellent reputation (in a field that's full of cowboy operators, but I digress). There is, as AlessandroTiandelli333 rightly observes, no shortage of reliable sources here. You surely know that notability is established by the existence of sources, not by the state of the article; in this case notability is far beyond doubt. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:39, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Company meets WP:GNG with substantial coverage in several independent reliable sources. It is so well known in the UK that ex-Prime Minister David Cameron likened himself to "a giant Dyno-Rod".[5] Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:45, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable. WP:SNOWBALL Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:58, 15 March 2017 (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.