Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFP Technologies

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. Black Kite (talk) 21:40, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UFP Technologies

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

Multiple editors have CSD'd this, most recently as A7. Between the text and references that were in former versions that are now on the talk page A7 does not apply. I am withholding my keep/delete until later but am doing this AFD now as a procedural matter so this can be settled without further notability-related CSDs. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 07:55, 27 December 2013 (UTC) Just to clarify, the nomination is procedural and the nominator is temporarily neutral, although this may change later in the discussion. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 07:59, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by nominator The original author appears to be part of a group of inexperienced editors collaborating on creating business-related articles. They appear to be following a template. Some of the articles they create are clearly about notable companies. Some are clearly about non-notable companies. Some of the content they put in the articles is not suitable for Wikipedia. There is an effort underway to educate these editors. This fact should not prejudice the outcome of this AFD one way or the other. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 07:59, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question - how does one go about joining the group? DocumentError (talk) 08:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll answer on your talk page shortly. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 08:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 02:21, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 02:21, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 02:22, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Insufficient notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:48, 28 December 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Question. Would the creator of the article like to say if he has any relation, financial or otherwise, with the organization he writes about? Xxanthippe (talk) 02:48, 28 December 2013 (UTC).[reply]

NOTE: This article is one of around 62 mass produced from stock exchange listings. All either PRODed now, or those that have run their 7 days at AfD have been deleted. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:07, 31 December 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.