- 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. ✗plicit 07:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bender Machine Works
[edit]- Bender Machine Works (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)
Effectively unreferenced... major mess. The article's lead suggests it is about a company (which does not seem notable, no hits on GScholar). Much of the body seems to discuss some of their product or products ("Bender Washer/Releaser"). Then there is a big EL farm to their patents. At best I can say this is some historical WP:OR and sadly I doubt anything here can be rescued (GScholar returns zero hits for this "Bender Washer/Releaser"). At worst, this looks like a possible WP:HOAX, although AFD I lean towards ye old OR. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:41, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
-
- This is a lengthy article, what in particular about Wikipedia's criteria for notability does it not meet? Liz Read! Talk! 03:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Liz Errr, are you serious? From GNG: "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Now, are you seeing, well... sources? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, I don't think this is a hoax... looking through the page history I think it's just a few different inventions/ patents from this one guy, and the title of the article is misleading. I did a newspaper archive search but the few results are in passing and don't seem to all be about the same subject. Unfortunately I think this is either too obscure to pass GNG, or the actually notable parts of the article are sufficiently obscured by other elements of it. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 03:27, 30 March 2024 (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.