Wiki143:Articles for deletion/Streamlight

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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 11:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Streamlight

I deleted this page through the WP:PROD process, and the nominator contacted me asking me to reconsider. I have restored it and will list it here, although I feel it does not pass the notability standards established by WP:CORP. (ESkog)^(Talk) 16:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. nn Bucketsofg 18:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• delete nn, fails WP:CORP Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 19:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. 30+ year company. Worldwide government, public safety, military contracts. Assignee of 50+ patents. Not as notable as Google or Microsoft, but if you ask a firefighter, police officer or Army ranger I'd bet most have heard of them or have a Streamlight with them. Dual Freq 19:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Dual Freq. Appears to be very notable in the flashlight business, if not quite on the same level as the MagLite. Haikupoet 04:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. While the public knows Maglite, professionals typically use either Streamlight or Surefire flashlights. Ever wonder what those flashlights are on CSI: Crime Scene Investigation? They're either Streamlight or Surefire, not Maglite. In addition to being featured on CSI three times per week, there have been many articles written about Streamlight flashlights in various consumer, hunting and camping books and periodicals.

The general public may not be familiar with Streamlight, but neither are they with Surefire. In fact there are many Wikipedia articles on watches and knives most of the public have never heard of: Chaika watches, Panerai, Oris, Spyderco, Benchmade, Wusthof, Henckels, etc, etc. If this article is deleted, that calls into question all of them. There's a difference between a company not being notable vs the general public being unfamiliar with it. Joema 04:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Not disputed. Please expand the article with evidence of meeting WP:CORP, I'm sure this will be easy for you given your detailed knowledge of the subject, and then it will be a shoo-in. Otherwise it's in trouble... Just zis Guy you know? 12:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

As I already stated, there are many non-trivial articles written on Streamlight and their products. Below are a few:

• Journal: Law & Order 08-01-2004, ISSN: 00239194
• The Shooting Industry. Pub.: May 2004.Vol.49, Iss. 5; pg. 16, 1 pgs
• The American Hunter. Washington: Mar 1995.Vol.23, Iss. 2; pg. 18, 1 pgs
• Workbench. Kansas City: Mar 1993.Vol.49, Iss. 1; pg. 12
• Firehouse. New York: Oct 2005. Vol. 30, Iss. 10; pg. 92, 1 pgs
• Security, Pub.: 2003-08, Volume: 40, Issue: 7
• The Washington Post, Pub.: 2005-10-30, Pages: T.35
• The Shooting Industry, Pub.: 2001-11, Volume: 46, Issue: 11, Pages: 13
  
  

On what basis are the people voting for deletion doing so? Gut feel? Joema 16:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Please keep this article. We own 15 Streamlight products and have been very happy with the performance and my family uses them daily. Their price and warranty are excellent compared to other brands of flashlights! 3-15-06

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.