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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Galloway European[edit]

Galloway European (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)

Article clearly fails WP:ORGCRIT. Only secondary sources surround the purchase of the firm by a local business owner. The history of the organisation has been sourced directly from the firm website. A quick search online brings up no indication that this firm could be notable. I would have suggested merging it with the business owners other bus company however it seems the two firms are unrelated. 59abcd (talk) 11:42, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After launching this AfD see that another discussion led to a delete conclusion on 28 March 2011. 59abcd (talk) 11:46, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Transportation. 59abcd (talk) 11:42, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable, no reliable sources. --ArdynOfTheAncients (talk) 17:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:09, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:42, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Considering that the last time this article came to AFD the decision was to Keep, I'm willing to relist a third time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Existing sourcing fails WP:NCORP. Searching for additional print newspaper sources in the British Newspaper Archive is a bit painful, since the company had tons of print ads in the '80s and '90s. I found a few discussions of service changes, but to my mind not sufficient (too routine). No apparent academic interest (JSTOR/Google Scholar) in the company. Suriname0 (talk) 18:01, 28 September 2022 (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.