Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ajax Motor Vehicle 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 keep. ST47 (talk) 18:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ajax Motor Vehicle Company

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:CORP or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 18:11, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 18:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 18:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 18:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is just one more example of why I should stop wasting my time creating pages at all. I won't waste any defending it. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 18:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The print-only references appear to be valid and sufficient for a company that operated more than a century ago. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep How many references are you expecting for such an obscure topic, so long ago? It's in the obvious directories, where it might be an issue to not be listed. This is also a very new article and there's plenty of scope for expansion. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Trekphiler has been vexed quite enough for one day. Ajax is notable and found in good histories of the era such as https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Fot_DwAAQBAJ --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and lets have an end to the nomination of historical articles. The question is not whether there are online references. Rathfelder (talk) 08:46, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Early automotive history. Don't delete history. --SVTCobra (talk) 20:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is encyclopedic, Alex-h (talk) 12:44, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with Andy Dingley. As this company is very old finding reliable sources is very hard. Masum Reza^📞 10:46, 24 June 2019 (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.