Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RKS Design

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:20, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RKS Design

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

No evidence of notability. The references are primarily press releases. There aren o actual awards--the Business Week listings are one on many on a list. DGG ( talk ) 05:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 08:51, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 06:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:40, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- for a long-operating business, one would expect some book mentions, but I'm seeing director listings only: link. GNews brings up mostly quotes from executives and PR-driven materials. Just a company going about its business; not encyclopedically relevant. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:05, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I agree that for a business operating since 1980, there is very little coverage. While there are references, I don't see anything that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:34, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The products are more notable that the design company - not unusual at all. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND and GNG. -- HighKing⁺⁺16:21, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Searches did not turn up anything which shows that this passes either WP:CORPDEPTH or WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am surprised that a business operating since 1980 does not have more coverage. That aside, not enough at this time to warrant an article. CORPDEPTH. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:47, 10 August 2017 (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.