Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tecumseh Group, Inc.

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. Stifle (talk) 15:38, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tecumseh Group, Inc.

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

No reliable third-party references to establish notability. Non-notable chatboard company. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 05:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Doesn't appear to be notable, and seems close to spam McMarcoP (talk) 08:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to discuss the article - and I'm wincing that it even appeared to be close to spam to anyone. It's certainly true that I'm a long time user of the site (same user-name MikeLacey) but the article was not intended as spam. I'd suggest that the site is notable because of it's size and vendor independence. And now it occurs to me that I should probably have made that plain in the article... MikeLacey (talk) 14:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After some thought I wihdraw my objections to the deletion of the article. I've spent some time thinking of how to revise the article so that it meets the criteria. Not easy, I've discovered. If the consensus is that the article should be deleted then ok - though I'm not sure how the article on the other company called tecumseh is notable. I'd suggest that articles on such ordinary companies document 'what is' and serve a mainly historical function. I'm happy to accept the consensus - & thanks for not deleting out of hand. ”””” —Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeLacey (talk • contribs) 22:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see notability either. The independence is cool and different, but not notable unto itself. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 00:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:CORP. Written by Victoria Berry, This article from ITWorld Canda discusses Tecumseh Group's establishment of different forums. Also, this article from Lightwave Magazine verifies that Tecumseh is the "largest independent forum management company on the Internet". Furthermore, even though notability is not inherited, Tecumseh is the creator of Eng-Tips Forums. Cunard (talk) 06:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not pass the organization notability guideline, because "IT World Canada" and "Lightwave Magazine" would appear to be trade publications with limited readership outside the fields they cater to. A forum management company which runs the Tek-Tips and Eng-Tips forums just isn't the sort of thing that's going to become a household name. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:16, 25 August 2009 (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.