Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nu-Venture (3rd nomination)

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 draftify to User:Davey2010/Nu-Venture. Daniel (talk) 22:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nu-Venture

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Coverage on this company is limited to WP:ROUTINE local news articles on route changes and occasionally anti social behaviour. Fails WP:NCORP. SK2242 (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep as per the very first AFD - Certainly one of the top 5 bus operators in Kent. Although the sources I've added aren't brilliant IMHO notabilty is there and certainly meets WP:BASIC. –Davey2010^Talk 01:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While "top 5 bus operators in Kent" isn’t nothing I don’t believe its major enough of an achievement for the company to bypass the requirement for significant in depth sources. There was also the 2nd AfD that was incorrectly closed as no consensus when no editors !voted Keep. SK2242 (talk) 03:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately publishers have a tendency to delete their articles (case proven with KOL) and I've witnessed this with the Irish Mirror too so it does happen so just because there's nothing online now doesn't mean there wasn't something a few years ago. Anyway I've found this and [1] which I would say ever so slightly push the article towards being notable. I still maintain the company is notable but it's hard to prove that point when like I say news companies delete their news articles. –Davey2010^Talk 21:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

True. But in this case the first source is only a brief mention, the second source is more than that but coverage is mainly of a bus fire which would fall under WP:ROUTINE. SK2242 (talk) 00:25, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is however IMHO a mention is better than nothing at all, Press reader has tons of coverage on the company] however they're all local. I did find a brief mention on the Telegraph however the contents of that were pasted from WikiTravel/Wikivoyage.

Still, by a bare minimum I believe there's some notability there although by a very bare minimum. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Link to Pressreader because URL messes text up. > http://www.pressreader.com/search?query="nu-venture"&languages=en&groupBy=Language&hideSimilar=0&type=1&state=1

Move to User:Davey2010/Nu-Venture where I can continue to improve the article and source where necessary - Article wouldn't be moved unless significant sources pop up which if they did I'd submit via Draft first. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:18, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom's reply to Davey2010. AnotherEditor144^{talk contribs} 09:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:09, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete edit to include draftify option or Draftify We're fairly strict on article about companies/organizations and the criteria for establishing notability is strict and goes way beyond BASIC. I am unable to locate any deep or significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails WP:NCORP. draftify As per WP:ATD, Davey2010 wants to search for sources and otherwise improve the article if possible. No probs for it to be moved to Drafts. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:39, 23 February 2021 (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.