Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alterra Mountain Company (2nd nomination)

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, default to keep.. Steve Smith (talk) 18:51, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alterra Mountain Company

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

Only a few months since the previous AFD, there is still nothing to indicate WP:NCORP is met. SmartSE (talk) 23:34, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 23:46, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 23:46, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging previous participants: @DGG, BrandonALF, HighKing, and K.e.coffman: SmartSE (talk) 23:47, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have had achange of opinion since my earlier nomination. This is essentially a list of notable resorts belonging to one large company, and useful as such. Useful is an adequate reason for a lsit. DGG ( talk ) 02:00, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Fair enough to have a change of opinion, DGG, but can you provide two references that support a Keep !vote? HighKing⁺⁺ 09:37, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a list, the refs are in the constitutent articles: just retitle in List of Alterra resorts. DGG ( talk ) 03:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Here at Wikipedia, we don't rely on editors' opinions. For Companies and Organizations, we require a minimum of two references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. Also, Notability is not inherited. While this is a holding company for individual ski resorts (and perhaps a proportion of those may individually be notable) it does not appear to be notable in its own right. There are no references that, in my opinion, meet the criteria for establishing notability and therefore this recreated article must, once again, be deleted. HighKing⁺⁺ 09:37, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I also note that the article creator, DA201, recreated this topic 1 week after the previous version of the article was deleted, notably has a total of 19 edits all related to editing articles on the individual ski resorts linked to Alterra. For a new account though, the editor displays a remarkable proficiency with Wikipedia editing styles and standards. Leaving aside the swift ignoring of the result of the previous AfD, it is pretty obvious that the account is an SPA, likely has a COI and is connected with Alterra and may be a paid editor. Doing run-arounds on Wikipedia decisions should not be rewarded in my opinion. HighKing⁺⁺ 09:44, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per HighKing, especially "notability is not inherited." Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:27, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am the one who created the page. I do not work for the company at hand or any company in the industry, but thought the page should exist as a page exists for its direct competitor Vail Resorts. DA201 ( talk ) 00:48, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep due to its ownership of a large portfolio of notable assets. The article is useful to tie them together. The sources will come, it is a stub and these resorts always generate controversy so in time the sources will materialize. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 20:08, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per DGG and Jtbobwaysf, having a list of this sort is very useful. Also, the Denver Post ([1] and SkiMagazine ([2]) articles (at a minimum) meet WP:NCORP, so Alterra appears to meet the requirements for keeping on that basis as well.-Mparrault (talk) 23:36, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This list is made up of notable resorts. -- Dane ^talk 04:20, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete notability is not inherited. While the content might stand alone as an article of list, the subject doesn't. Per WP:ARTN, content doesn't make subject notability. Having a list of a notable resorts doesn't make the company owning them notable. And my brief search on Google and a few business related sources doesn't yield significant coverage of the subject. Xinbenlv (talk) 18:30, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: works as WP:LISTN as all resorts are independently notable. An overview article, with brief info on the corporate parent, is appropriate. Could possibly be moved to "List of ..." article, but this could be decided on the article's Talk page. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment K.e.coffman, can you take another look? LISTN states that the "notability of lists is based on the group". The "group" suggested in this article is the parent company, Alterra Mountain Company. Yet the parent company isn't notable in its own right and NOTINHERITED applies. This is a case where the parent company is attempting to derive notability from the resorts in the list (again NOTINHERITED) and therefore is the opposite of LISTN. I have no objection to the resorts being included in List of ski areas and resorts in the United States. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:06, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, not just for the notable properties, but the newly formed company itself has started to get some coverage. In addition to that mentioned above, Chicago Tribune [[3]], Aspen Times [[4]] and USA Today. [[5]]. Passes WP:GNG TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:16, 6 June 2018 (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.