Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U.S. Corrugated

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 keep. Merger discussion can take place on the talk page.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Corrugated

edit
U.S. Corrugated (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable company. All but two of the references are self-published. Albacore (talk) 22:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – The topic passes WP:GNG per:
—Northamerica1000(talk) 22:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The only reason not to keep this would be to merge it with Kapstone; from a quick look the article should be updated to reflect the new corporate parent. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 03:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Kapstone its parent company it has acquired acquired with a section for U.S. Corrugated.The Company was called Four M Manufacturing in 1966 , then Box USA from 1994 till 2006 when it became U.S. Corrugated and 2012 again it is being acquired by Kapstone and I doubt whether it was noteworthy under this name it was founded and known by another name Four M for the longest period.The sources and news is largely about the merger ,internal and except for news about an order or a factory being opened which is relatively less for US company.As per WP:Otherstuffexists ,the argument is not that if a company merges that article should be merged in every case but feel it should be merged here.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, do not merge. The company itself is notable from the time of its independence. There's no precedent for deleting company articles when they get taken over, and it's a ridiculous precedent to set - we don't delete the articles on Wang Laboratories, Trans World Airlines or British Satellite Broadcasting just because they've now been absorbed by another corporation. I can't see how this is any different - the only issue is whether the pre-takeover company was noteworthy, and I think it's been clearly shown that it was. Mogism (talk) 14:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mogism, I think you make an argument that's valid for big companies such as those you've cited. In this case, however, I think our readers are better served having one larger, more closely watched article; it's likely to be more reliable than 2 smaller articles about notable, but obscure organizations.--A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:49, 12 July 2012 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/U.S._Corrugated&oldid=1138753181"