Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray McDavid

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 no consensus. NPASR. (non-admin closure) buff bills 7701 12:24, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Murray McDavid

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

This is not a notable company. It has ceased trading, having sold up to ACEO which does not have a Wikipedia page. The name is no longer used for trading purposes. The on-line sources for Murray McDavid are not independent and are, generally, just reproductions of the Murray McDavid press releases. The only notable activity the company ever did was to acquire Bruichladdich distillery which is correctly cited on the Bruichladdich page H6PAYH (talk) 02:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:05, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable whiskey maker. Covered substantially in reliable independent sources. Notability does not expire because the line has been ceased. Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:43, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Murray McDavid was not a producer of whisky. They were a company which bought other people's whisky and bottled it under their own label. They did buy Bruichladdich distillery which continues to operate having since been sold on but this is correctly referred to on the Bruichladdich page. Murray McDavid was a very minor bottler of whisky of no great note and which was essentially ephemeral. The company and its whisky stocks were sold on to another company which no longer uses the Murray McDavid brand names. The fact that the company was listed in directories and was a party in a court case (the sources mentioned above) do not qualify for notability.H6PAYH (talk) 22:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you are splitting hairs as far as whether they produced whisky. Many wineries buy grapes from other wineries and sell them under their label. The notability is established by the very substantial coverage in reliable sources in cluding th book source I linked to which are not directories. Candleabracadabra (talk) 04:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the same as a winery. A winery buys grapes and makes wine with it. In the case of a whisky bottler, they buy whisky that has already been distilled, put in a cask and matured. All they do is buy the cask and bottle it. Murray McDavid did own a distillery for a while - that distillery continues and has its own wikipedia page as it should. The references you have pointed to do little more than show that Murray McDavid existed. The book source simply lists every company that existed at a given date that was involved in the whisky industry. Inclusion in that book is no more a measure of notability than inclusion in a telephone directory. Given that notability is not supposed to erode with time, we need to ask ourselves whether, in ten or twenty years' time, anyone will care that this company briefly traded. If the answer is yes then we might as well have pages dedicated to every small business that operates in my small town. Page for Lloyd The Mower Man anyone? H6PAYH (talk) 07:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:14, 13 February 2014 (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.