Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sutorbilt
- 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! 23:19, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sutorbilt (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)
Promotional article and sources are all far too primary. Lack of independent coverage. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:38, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, and Engineering. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" (hihi) 02:07, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Delete The article doesn’t show that Sutorbilt is notable. All the sources are from the company itself or sellers, and there’s no independent coverage. It reads like advertising rather than an encyclopedia article.--Killviconiborki (talk) 14:19, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Delete- lacks enough SIGCOV even with additional searching to suggest standalone notability. an ATD maybe is a redirect to Ingersoll Rand.Lorraine Crane (talk) 12:25, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per Killviconiborki. --Lenny Marks (talk) 16:47, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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.