Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyseley Car Company

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 merge to Tyseley Locomotive Works. Seems the outcome most likely to be agreeable to most contributors here.  Sandstein  14:53, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tyseley Car Company

Tyseley Car Company (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)

I searched at News, Books, browser, Newspapers Archive, highbeam and thefreelibrary and was unable to find many good sources aside from this (one of the best results seems to be the "World's Carriers and Carrying Trades' Review" but it's not fully available). Given it was a short-lived company, that could explain the low amount of sources and not to mention (maybe some offline and archived sources) and I would think it's best to mention this elsewhere (maybe aside from List of car manufacturers of the United Kingdom), not there's not much anyway. It's interesting to note this article was started by an IP (when that could still happen) but has received very minor edits and, unless archived sources are found, I'm not seeing any possible improvment (that's probably why no one has edited it). SwisterTwister talk 00:15, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Plus no indication of significance. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:19, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No indication of significance. ~Euphoria42 05:20, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete - To a point I hate !voting delete on articles like this but unfortunately there is no notability on this company at all so will have to say Delete. –Davey2010^Talk 03:05, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or merge. It's mentioned in The New encyclopedia of motorcars, 1885 to the present (1982 edition). Although World's Carriers and Carrying Trades' Review is in search results, that's probably only because Garner Motors, the subject of coverage there, was based in Tyseley. Peter James (talk) 15:40, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Peter James. That the company was covered in another encyclopedia strongly indicates that it is notable. Cunard (talk) 05:27, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as a short section in Tyseley Locomotive Works. It is unfortunate that that article jumps straight from 1908 to 1968, so that the merged section will not sit comfortably in the target, but that should be handled by tagging the target as incomplete. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2015 (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.