Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Durham Travel Services

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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Durham Travel Services

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

Prompted from London Easylink AfD. Long defunct non notable company with no chance of expansion. aycliffe^talk 07:33, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -Davey2010T 01:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets WP:CORP's key requirement of significant coverage in multiple sources of regional or national scope - relevant sources include [1], [2] and [3] and more offline (this being 2002 and before, many sources were still print-only at the time). 81.178.183.237 (talk) 15:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- Is a company that lasted a mere three years really notable? This is when I see AFDs on a company in which £50M has bene invested. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If the sources are up to scratch then yes it is - other company articles being nominated wrongly isn't a basis for deleting this. But three years thing is wrong anyway since it refers only to London operations, and this source makes it clear that the company had been doing other work for 14 years before its collapse. 81.178.183.237 (talk) 16:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Although notable(ish) ...They're only known for the links above .... and that's it ....

So delete per nom non notable defunct company. -Davey2010T 16:10, 17 September 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.