Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thermoplan AG

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. Synergy 00:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thermoplan AG

I am unable to decide whether this company is notable enough for an article. It has been tagged as unreferenced and deficient for several months and the author has not contributed for a long time, so there is little hope that he will come back and improve it. The company does exist and the claim that it supplies Starbucks seems to be true. It also holds patents related to coffee machines. It does not seem to be listed on any major stock exchange. Obviously, the article would need to be rewritten if it was kept. The purpose of the AfD is to determine whether this is worth doing. I am neutral on this. DanielRigal (talk) 11:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ It's not a notable enough company... maybe if they supply the majority of coffee machines in the U.S. or something, but this is a definite "not notable" imho atm. JasonDUIUC (talk) 19:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep , but needs a rewrite, and a few more sources. The current sources that were recently added are both major national newspapers, and are a year apart, which seems pretty notability-establishing to me. Moreover, if the firm truly is the LONE supplier of Starbucks, and is the home of the Brazilian national team in the "off" season, that's enough in my book to make them more than a one-hit wonder. At this point, I feel confident that the article could improve to the level of an average wiki article on a smaller company. My .02. Cheers!JasonDUIUC (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- raven1977 (talk) 22:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references which I think are enough to establish notability. -- Eastmain (talk) 23:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:34, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

very weak keep. Normally,a manufacturing company with 125 employees. wouldnot be notable; but it seems from the article that it might possibly be the leader in a significant niche of integrated coffee shop machinery.
Keep - notability is established, I see no reason to deviate from the usual standards here. Wily D 12:21, 23 October 2008 (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.