Talk:List of clock manufacturers

The article starts off with: "The following is a list of notable companies that produced, or currently produce clocks."; however, the list is full of entries with no articles to show notability, and many without even references. So, what should we use as our definition of "notable" here?

1. An English Wikipedia article to show notability (often used for lists of notable things) and production of clocks?
2. A Wikipedia article in any language that establishes notability and production of clocks?
3. An unlinked company with independent reliable sources that establish that they were notable clockmakers?

As it stands, we have some entries that meet criterion 1, none that meet criterion 2, and possibly one or two that would meet criterion 3. There are a few entries that have no articles and are sourced to non-reliable sources (such as company websites), but the majority of entries have neither articles nor sources. Meters (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for letting me know about this. I feel the minimum inclusion criteria for a list such as this is to either have an article to link to, or be able to attach a secondary source to the entry. I chose not to delete the older redlinked entries on this list that don't currently meet that criteria as a lot of them can actually be sourced relatively easily; the one I removed was a contemporary "clock maker" that doesn't actually make parts but rather just throws them together. I think this is more of a case of "wait for someone to get around to it", no need to cull it at this time. If you want to work on it, I can give you leads for the best sources. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 19:20, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Also... German Wikipedia has way better horology content. I'd check and see what clock manufacturers they have articles on, and use interlanguage links for those. -- MediaKyle (talk) 19:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)