Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TNT Fireworks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. While !votes were pretty evenly split, no real rebuttal was provided to the final source analyses provided by editors advocating deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 21:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TNT Fireworks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

not notable according to no reliable sources and WP:NCORP. Facebook source should be deleted. Tls9-me (talk) 08:32, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947edits 03:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://corporateofficeheadquarters.org/tnt-fireworks-inc/ Blog source (ironically uses Wikipedia for info) No No No
https://www.tntfireworks.com/ No Own website ~ No
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nonprofits-forge-successful-partnerships-with-consumer-fireworks-leader-259988801.html No Source says "NEWS PROVIDED BY TNT Fireworks" at the top of the article" Yes No
https://www.coinbooks.org/resources/anb2021.pdf Yes Yes No Directory of companies No
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/04800387 Yes Yes Government listing of the company ? Unknown
https://tucson.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/county-is-sued-over-its-ban-on-fireworks/article_c33b7882-4920-5b79-b340-59edcc58f1be.html Yes Yes Yes Yes
https://www.al.com/business/2017/06/tnt_fireworks_recalled_for_une.html Yes Yes Yes Yes
https://www.wtvy.com/content/news/36000-units-of-TNT-Fireworks-being-recalled--431754923.html Yes Yes Yes Yes
https://www.westernslopenow.com/news/local-news/tnt-fireworks-safe-and-responsible-use-campaign/ Yes Yes Yes Yes
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/conditions-right-for-exciting-bassmaster-classic-on-the-tennessee-river-301775154.html Yes No Brief name mention No
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110614007221/en/Buckhorn%C2%AE-Assists-with-Tornado-Disaster-Relief-Efforts Yes Yes Yes Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
siroχo 02:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I agree and pretty obviously too. For example this in tucson.com about the county getting sued over its bad on fireworks has two mentions-in-passing of the company. It has zero in-depth information about the company and fails WP:CORPDEPTH. One of these days I'm gonna do a source table for GNG/NCORP so that we can explicitly evaluate CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. HighKing++ 21:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Very well prepared and presented source analysis table, which gives a clear indication that that article is non-notable. I can't see any definition in the references that would indicate it was notable. Woeful sources really Fails WP:NCORP. scope_creepTalk 11:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If someone here wants to take stewardship of it to avoid backdoor deletion, I think there's a promising case for draftifying here. This is an old company and there will very likely be analog sources. We just can't really guarantee NPOV without any at all. —siroχo 11:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 02:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

--A. B. (talkcontribsglobal count) 15:45, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you present WP:THREE or even 2 that meet WP:SIRS? —siroχo 20:43, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Raw search url results are non-rs as you can't identify what article is being talked about, so that is non-statement. If you have sources that satisfy WP:THREE then present so we can examine them. As at the moment, there is not coverage that satisfies WP:SIRS and WP:NCORP. Post something that is valid instead on non-statements. scope_creepTalk 15:39, 19 July 2023 (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.
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy