Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electroimpact
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Electroimpact (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not have significant coverage that meets WP:ORGCRIT or WP:CORPDEPTH. There is some local press from the Everett Herald but nothing that appears worthy of notice outside of the Seattle area with the exception of limited press about a civil rights settlement. I started a WP:HEY but don't want to continue based on notability. CNMall41 (talk) 19:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, United States of America, and Washington. CNMall41 (talk) 19:43, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Seems only of local interest. Really more of an article on the non-notable founder than on the company. Finding no non-local coverage at all on products or business of the company. Hyperbolick (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Electroimpact has received significant coverage in the Seattle times, a good portion of it before the racism from the CEO. They are a major supplier for Boeing, which has been noted in news sources. Not sure if there are specific guidelines on size of area to be considered notable, but the greater Seattle area is plenty large with about 4 million people in it. Even if it's just that area that's interest, >1% of the US population is still quite a few people. I do think the article could be improved with sources about more than the CEO being racist.
- Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for your !vote. Hoping to get some clarification on your reasoning for keep. I realize it can be difficult for experienced users to navigate WP:NCORP, let alone someone new to editing such pages. There is no guideline about size of area. It doesn't matter how many people there are in Seattle. A reliable source is a reliable source regardless on the size of the city. That being said, the sources are still mainly local. We can sometimes use regional sources but there aren't any here that come close to WP:ORGCRIT that are outside of the area. You also state that it can be improved by using other sources. If you can provide those sources I would be happy to take a look as the page would need extensive cleanup for NPOV should it be kept. Regarding the comment about the CEO, be careful about naming someone. There is a lot that can be deduced about the subject from the sources, but it is not our job as Wikipedia editors to label that person as such unless it is widely published in reliable sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:17, 1 April 2025 (UTC)
- As far as sources about what the company does, here are several. I don't have time to write much right now, but I'll try to update the article when I have the chance. These are still mainly Seattle Times articles, but I believe they meet the notability guidelines set out in WP:NCORP. The coverage of anti-Muslim discrimination is also, unfortunately, notable given its in-depth coverage in the Seattle times + its less detailed coverage nationally.
- 2004 article on what the firm does + it's participation building the A380
- Article about their fiber-laying machines for Boeing
- Article about Boeing plant with a large portion devoted to the machinery from Electroimpact
- [https://manufacturing-today.com/news/electroimpact-comprehensive-engineering-from-design-to-delivery/%7C Profile in manufacturing today
- I do think that we should be leaning toward WP:PRESERVE for this article, hence my vote for keep, given the sources available about company culture and the company's importance in airplane manufacture in particular. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:58, 1 April 2025 (UTC)
- As far as sources about what the company does, here are several. I don't have time to write much right now, but I'll try to update the article when I have the chance. These are still mainly Seattle Times articles, but I believe they meet the notability guidelines set out in WP:NCORP. The coverage of anti-Muslim discrimination is also, unfortunately, notable given its in-depth coverage in the Seattle times + its less detailed coverage nationally.
- Thanks for your !vote. Hoping to get some clarification on your reasoning for keep. I realize it can be difficult for experienced users to navigate WP:NCORP, let alone someone new to editing such pages. There is no guideline about size of area. It doesn't matter how many people there are in Seattle. A reliable source is a reliable source regardless on the size of the city. That being said, the sources are still mainly local. We can sometimes use regional sources but there aren't any here that come close to WP:ORGCRIT that are outside of the area. You also state that it can be improved by using other sources. If you can provide those sources I would be happy to take a look as the page would need extensive cleanup for NPOV should it be kept. Regarding the comment about the CEO, be careful about naming someone. There is a lot that can be deduced about the subject from the sources, but it is not our job as Wikipedia editors to label that person as such unless it is widely published in reliable sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:17, 1 April 2025 (UTC)