Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Castle Group

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Castle Group

The Castle Group (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)

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and New Jersey. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It is difficult to tell whether the subject has any major holding on the structural engineering industry, just as it is difficult to tell from a citation search whether the article's expansiveness covers a justifiable range of points. One would find that the vast majority of citations have to do with either self-published sources or notations to do with awards granted to the company (all of which are from New Jersey, the company's founding region, I noticed), and one would also find that the lack of widespread coverage on the subject apart from the already-embedded sources make little more than a mere trivial mention of the subject or its active projects over time. As such, I would agree - the subject definitely fails to meet WP:ORGDEPTH as well as other critical criteria and should therefore be deleted. TheMysteriousShadeheart (talk) 18:36, 22 January 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.