Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Go Goodwins

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. J04n(talk page) 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go Goodwins

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

Non notable company, (Had removed routes but restored for afd) –
→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 21:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as company doesn't meet Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines, only one-single source, no unbiased public coverage... Alex^{discussion ★} 21:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you folks are forgetting how this article was in its heyday, which despite the copyright problem, shows notability. Now it has been stripped of that, narrow minded deletionists just want to eradicate everything bus without searching for its notability. Why not improve and expand the article instead of removing it? It makes me sick how I spend hours and hours creating these articles and then serial deletionists come along and nominate it without thinking twice about its merits and history. It goes without saying that I !vote keep. Rcsprinter (state the obvious) @ 22:09, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Not our problem, article has no history, & refs, So it's clearly non notable.→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 22:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:JNN, WP:SOFIXIT, WP:NOTCLEANUP. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Is the company notable for anything other than transporting the cricket teams? If so, what? czar · · 23:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: you nominated twice, davey. Ansh666 22:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I know, the first nom didn't appear on afd list so re-done. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 22:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably would have made more sense to delete the 2nd nom instead of redirecting the first—less cruft left over. czar · · 23:09, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't think of that but thanks, →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→23:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's pure WP:PROMO and WP:SPAM and WP:ADVERT. The guys behind this article are just trying to make money by getting people to ride these buses. They should lay out the cash for their own website and stop using Wikipedia as a free web-hosting service, which we are WP:NOT. Qworty (talk) 23:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Those claims are completely unfounded and as far as I know, untrue. There is no advertising intent here at all. Rcsprinter (warn) @ 09:42, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This may be of borderline notability, but the suggestion that it is of promotional intent does not seem credible. As for the absurd comment that "they should lay out the cash for their own website", they clearly already have - aside from the list of routes, the URL of said website is about the only piece of content in the article! Quackdave (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. czar · · 23:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. czar · · 23:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. czar · · 23:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are a few good refs in Rcsprinter's diff, and I didn't find much more in search, but I don't see the claim of notability other than being the official transport of the English cricket teams. If something else comes up, I'd reconsider. It must be discouraging to see the article go, but consider that we looked and just don't see the WP:ORGDEPTH. czar · · 23:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom.Wilbysuffolk (Talk to me!) 20:01, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:PERNOM isn't a good enough rationale, Tell us why.... →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 20:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- We have recently culled all articles on British bus routes. This is an article about a bus operator, rather than a bus route, but the same objections apply. WP:NOTTRAVEL. The routes operated are liable to change, which will mean that the article will need maintenance, but no one has any incentive to ensure that it does not go out of date. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Refs don't exist to show notability. Lack of coverage means it doesn't meet WP:GNG. Ducknish (talk) 21:07, 2 May 2013 (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.