Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bingle (3rd 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 Make dab. Spartaz Humbug! 14:58, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bingle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, fails WP:GNG. Another version has been previously deleted in 2010 for same reason Joseph2302 (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate/merge info only: I agree with Joseph2302's comment below that a DAB page would be a better option than merging with a redirect, hence strike through. One of the items on the DAB page could be "Bingle Insurance, part of the Suncorp Group". The sole citation and the relationship to AAI Limited could be included on the Suncorp Group page. Meticulo (talk) 01:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or merge: This particular brand does not appear to meet WP:NCORP / WP:GNG. Merger may be an option, though the current Suncorp Group article does not mention its AAI Limited subsidiary (previously Australian Alliance Insurance, I think) or its relations with Vero_Insurance or this brand. AAI Limited's various entities and brands are listed on p76 of this financial report. Introducing Bingle onto the overall parent article could be WP:UNDUE but we lack any other redirect target. The present article is providing little more than an "It's a brand" placemarker, and deletion may be the better option, as well as being consistent with the second AfD discussion and decision. AllyD (talk) 07:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge/delete with no redirect--- bingle is well known as an Australian slang term, this is a non-notable company. Would suggest salting this to force any article to first get a review either through DRAFT process or at least by an admin Gnangarra 15:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would be against salting, purely because I think that Bingle would be a sensible disambiguation page. There are multiple people with surname Bingle (which is how I came across this article in the first place), as well as Bingle Bangle and Bingles, and thus I would suggest delete and then create a new dab page would be best solution. For that reason, I'm also against keeping the redirect, as suggested by Meticulo earlier. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:15, 12 June 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.