Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superior Offshore International

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. Sandstein 20:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Superior Offshore International

[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)

Article about a company that has been unsourced since creation in 2008. DePRODed by User:DGG with a suggestion that I look again for sources. I haven’t found any so AFAICS this fails WP:NCORP. However there may be local US press coverage that I can’t see, so perhaps someone else will find something. Mccapra (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

considering the company is no longe extant, this may require a search through older print sources as well. DGG ( talk ) 18:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sulfurboy (talk) 14:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I worked in that industry for fifteen years before retraining to become a teacher. I did a fair amount of work in the Gulf of Mexico, and an outfit like that would have been exactly the sort of client my firm would have provided equipment and services to. I have not done an exhaustive search of printed sources to look for coverage, but going from the information in the article, I would be surprised if there was much in the way of significant coverage out there to find about them outside of trade magazines (the sort where you pay them to write an article about you, or you write your own article and get it printed for free if you also pay for advertising). I've also never heard of them, which adds to my feeling of 'I doubt we'll find anything' - I knew most of the major players in that sector in the period they were active. I can't hang a !vote on any of that, and I'm not in a position to do a search for sources, but thought I'd drop it in there. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, on reflection, I think I can summon up a !vote - I think CSD A7 applies, because the article fails to indicate how the company is significant. Operating 11 service vessels, providing ROV and saturation diver services, working in the sorts of places that have oilfields - this is a description that could be applied to any small- to medium-sized oilfield services company on the world. The prose could have been (and probably was) lifted directly from the website or brochure of any of a hundred such firms all over the world. The prose fails WP:SIGNIF, it's probably copyvio from a now-defunct website, the likelihood of anyone having written about them to CORPDEPTH standards seems slim, so delete. GirthSummit _(blether) 15:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Girth Summit. Mbdfar (talk) 21:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not that this is particularly important, but I note that the original author was blocked as an advertising only account shortly after the creation of this unsourced article. The article has had the odd gnomish edit in the intervening years, but nobody else has made any substantive edits to the content since its creation. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:19, 11 May 2020 (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.