Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tormach
- 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 no consensus. Star Mississippi 02:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Tormach (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)
Non-notable manufacturing company fails WP:NCORP. All the coverage available consists of press releases (WP:PRSOURCE), niche WP:TRADES publications not contributing to notability, and WP:ORGTRIV news -- there's no WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS and thus no pass of NCORP. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Wisconsin. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Added new references from different publications and sites about the company and its products. Please Review. Chiffre01 (talk) 17:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- I see a single independent, reliable, secondary source with WP:SIGCOV that counts toward WP:NCORP (Wired) and we need multiple. Most of these sources are WP:TRADES, which don't contribute to notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:29, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep This is one of those CORP articles where it isn't clear if the article is about a product or the company, since they essentially are both called Tormach. I think there is plenty about the product (using current cite numbering): these are short but probably reliable - 2, 6, 9. These are long and presumably reliable: 7, 11. These could be useful for article content: 10, 12. As for WP:TRADES, I don't think we should toss out all trades articles - it looks like the source Design World is much broader than just the kinds of machine tools that this company makes; and Hackaday is even broader than that. Best 3? Wired, Design World, Hackaday. Lamona (talk) 04:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Lamona: The Aerospace Manufacturing and Design (2) is definitely a niche WP:TRADES publication, and the article itself is WP:ORGTRIV, routine coverage of new location(s). The Today's Medical Developments article (6) is a barely regurgitated press release from the company. The MakerWorks article (7) is a blog post by a company that services Tormach controllers and is not really secondary coverage. As for DesignWorld (11), it looks like a trade, but even if it's a broader publication, I don't think we can say it's reliable, since it has a supposedly bylined piece that is simply a verbatim reprinted press release from Tormach. You can find it in all sorts of other publications, virtually unaltered: [1], [2], [3], [4]. As for Hackaday, there are inconclusive RSN discussions on it (here, here); I would invite comments from @Graywalls, @Buidhe and @Slatersteven, independent participants in those discussions, on whether it's an appropriate source. The Wired article (9) I agree with you counts, but it's the only one that unambiguously counts toward WP:NCORP. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:00, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- The MakerWorks does not claim to be wedded to Tormach, but claims to provide a wide variety of tools. I'm not sure what you mean by "service Tormach controllers". Yes, we can drop anything that has just copied a press release - thanks for finding that. However, I don't see the press release that is the copy for the DesignWorld piece - could you link to that? I couldn't find it on the Tormach site. Lamona (talk) 21:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Lamona I don't see the press release on the Tormach website, but the identical text is posted on the sites I linked above, including this one where it is labeled a "press release", and this one where it is labeled "news from our sponsors". As for Maker Works, I may have misunderstood it, but it appears to be a blog from a local nonprofit maker space that has a Tormach mill. There is nothing here that suggests it is an editorially independent reliable source, particularly given the more stringent sourcing requirements of WP:NCORP. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- The MakerWorks does not claim to be wedded to Tormach, but claims to provide a wide variety of tools. I'm not sure what you mean by "service Tormach controllers". Yes, we can drop anything that has just copied a press release - thanks for finding that. However, I don't see the press release that is the copy for the DesignWorld piece - could you link to that? I couldn't find it on the Tormach site. Lamona (talk) 21:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Lamona: The Aerospace Manufacturing and Design (2) is definitely a niche WP:TRADES publication, and the article itself is WP:ORGTRIV, routine coverage of new location(s). The Today's Medical Developments article (6) is a barely regurgitated press release from the company. The MakerWorks article (7) is a blog post by a company that services Tormach controllers and is not really secondary coverage. As for DesignWorld (11), it looks like a trade, but even if it's a broader publication, I don't think we can say it's reliable, since it has a supposedly bylined piece that is simply a verbatim reprinted press release from Tormach. You can find it in all sorts of other publications, virtually unaltered: [1], [2], [3], [4]. As for Hackaday, there are inconclusive RSN discussions on it (here, here); I would invite comments from @Graywalls, @Buidhe and @Slatersteven, independent participants in those discussions, on whether it's an appropriate source. The Wired article (9) I agree with you counts, but it's the only one that unambiguously counts toward WP:NCORP. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:00, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- I have done some editing of the document, removing some of the press releases and adding some hacker/maker spaces that have information about their use. I feel like we need an analysis of the remaining sources, and I will try to get to that. Lamona (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've done an initial source assessment on what's currently in the article. I still don't see a WP:NCORP pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I have done some editing of the document, removing some of the press releases and adding some hacker/maker spaces that have information about their use. I feel like we need an analysis of the remaining sources, and I will try to get to that. Lamona (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm not really seeing anything beyond what's already in the source assessment table (other than brief name checks anyway), and I'd agree that the current souring is insufficient to retain. Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- 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.