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 keep. postdlf (talk) 00:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jardine Motors Group

[edit]

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

altho there are many references in trade publications, these are notoriously unreliable sources. Fails WP:ORG due to lack of WP:RS Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I nominated for a prod for the same reasons. Adding press releases does not make it any more notable. noq (talk) 00:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~ Keep on the strength of subsequent improvements. The present article is a mess, and the China operations are only sketchily referred to. Because the company operates under several different brands its visibility is low. That said, it was at one stage the largest motor dealer in the UK and owned, amongst others, Polar (Ford). Size is not everything, but there is a systemic problem in Wikipedia that even very large commercial organisations based outside the US (sometimes with turnover in the billions of US dollars, and the UK operation of Jardine Motors clearly exceed the billion mark) struggle to get past AfD. Company profiles which are truly independent of a company, especially a private one, are exceedingly rare - a newspaper or business journal may print something as its own editorial but the information has to come from the company. So unless we think that WP should not dirty itself with the nasty commercial world at all, then at least it is attempting to provide a service which nobody else does. The real question here seems to me not really notability but whether this needs a standalone article independent of Jardine Matheson. A better article probably would stand. --AJHingston (talk) 10:40, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- The article certainly needs a lot of improvement. The motor group appears to be a subsidiary of Jardine Matheson, which is a substantial UK plc, with origins in trade with China in the 19th century. It would be better of the article had some indication of size, such as the number of garages (dealerships) in UK, turnover and profits, but that is a matter to be rectified by editing, not a ground for deletion. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 02:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article has now been expanded and revised to address the points made by the above users. The company has a turnover of US$4Billion, is one of the 10 largest UK motor retailers and was at one stage, the largest UK motor retailer. I appreciate there is still some work to do on the article, though this, I feel, does not mean the article should be deleted, even in it's present form. GrouseyGrouse (talk) 12:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I still say Keep but it needs tagging for improvement. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:47, 5 January 2013 (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.