Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darwen Group

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 no consensus. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Darwen Group

[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)

Non-notable defunct bus company. Fails WP:NCORP. SailingInABathTub (talk) 11:42, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SailingInABathTub (talk) 11:42, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:04, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move to East Lancashire Coachbuilders, the majority of the page says that it supposedly rose from the ashes of the ELC collapse so that information would be useful there. Whether it warrants moving all of the information from there into here since Darwen allegedly was the new name for East Lancs is up for debate. NHPluto (talk) 15:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seem pl ez ^{{{ping}} me} 14:05, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: But really not objection to a quality merge by a person with a positive approach to the process. Such a process would likely be a discussed merge outside of AfD.Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2021 (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.