Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IKA-Works

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 16:28, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IKA-Works

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

Fails to meet WP:Corp, I can only find listings on business directories and the corp website. No significance or claim to notability is included in the article. Even the parent company does not seem to meet notability requirements for inclusion. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 01:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 01:18, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. - McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 01:19, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A Highbeam search turns up various product announcements in trade publications, but nothing that meets WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It might be that the parent company, IKE-Werke, may be more notable. Says they've been around since 1910, they have a , I see that they got some sort of award at this source. I'm not all that convinced that they are notable at this point, but IKA-Werke has a better case than IKA-Works. 0x0077BE ^{(talk · contrib)} 04:09, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the German-language secondary sources from the german article, for convenience (I don't speak German, so I'm just going off Google Translate: Story about a strike from their workers, Something trouble during their 100th anniversary, They had a successful year in 2012. These are all from Badische Zeitung. 0x0077BE ^{(talk · contrib)} 04:18, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: agree with AllyD nothing that would qualify this corp to have its own article.VViking_TalkEdits 23:30, 16 November 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.