Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marman Products

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 merge to Zeppo Marx. (non-admin closure) sst✈^(discuss) 08:31, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marman Products[edit]

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

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by anon User:2602:30A:2EFE:F050:E52A:8C67:E2A2:B864 with the following rationale "WP:CONTESTED"; that anon deprodded a number of articles with such meaningless rationale before disappearing, likely a WP:POINT disruption or a spammer trying to waste our time. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. PS. Do keep in mind notability is not inherited, and so the existence of some (potentially) notable products of that company, like their motocycle or Marman clamp does not mean that the company is notable; this company could probably redirect to Zeppo Marx where it is already briefly discussed. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:46, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 06:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 06:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 06:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Zeppo Marx as mentioned perhaps more rather than simply deleting as there's no apparent urgent need for deleting (although it's unlikely a better article can be made later). Cheers, SwisterTwister talk 06:43, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 14:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect as suggested. He's famous enough that this is worthwhile material DGG ( talk ) 02:37, 18 November 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.