Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Argo Tea (2 nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result of this AfD was "Keep" as the AfD was withdrawn and the consensus also points to "Keep" Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 02:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Argo Tea
2nd nom. 1st nom. Still fails WP:V and WP:CORP - crz crztalk 19:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and per WP:LOCAL Diez2 19:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment It's not clear where any of this is sourced from, but if it's all the company's website, that'd meet WP:V#Self-published_and_dubious_sources_in_articles_about_the_author.28s.29, but without some sources presented in the article, it does fail CORP. There are sources at the end of the first AFD that wouldn't be hard to incorporate and use in this article if Tony The Tiger can do that.--Kchase T 19:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. I've added a list of independent references and four more external links to independent websites. Two of the references are from ABC news, one is from the University of Chicago paper, about Argo Tea making a large donation of white tea leaves to cancer research at the U of C Hospital. Clearly satisfies WP:V and WP:CORP. More references to come. TheQuandry 19:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Not all the references you have listed are suitable for establishing notability, I would argue that all of your references are trivial or only touch upon Argo Tea and don't meet the requirements for establishing notability as set out at WP:CORP. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 20:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Well, I respectfully disagree with that. If nothing else, the first reference is a dedicated article from a newspaper in existence since the late 1800s. The article discusses how the company contributes to cancer research. TheQuandry 20:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails WP:CORP - No hits for Argo Tea on Google News, only 18,500 hits on Google proper of which the majority appear to be directory sites, Yellow Pages, that type of thing. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 20:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Still believe this is a notable young company. It is worth keeping. I still believe the WP:BIO alternate test of expandability (Will the article ever be more than a stub? Could the perfect article be written on this subject?) is quite relevant here. TonyTheTiger 20:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Please, before voting for delete, try the links I've added to the article. Google News is just one source. Try these Write-up in the Chicago Maroon (University of Chicago Student Newspaper), Entrepreneur Magazine interview with Argo Tea founder Arsen Avakian, ABC News story about tea stores in Chicago, with mention of Argo Tea, ABC News story about Argo Tea. TheQuandry 20:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I concur with TheQuandry. I feel they survive WP:CORP. They are a very young company. It took Intelligentsia Coffee & Tea 5 years to begin to gain real notoriety. I think for a 3 year old company they are off to a great start. Shouldn't this discussion be moved to a section of the talk page for the company. TonyTheTiger 21:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- The reason the article was nominated was suggested lack of notability so any discussions concerning the notability of the subject really belong here. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 21:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- nomination was for WP:V and WP:CORP, not WP:NN TonyTheTiger 21:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- True, and the references provided satisfy WP:CORP. The interpretation of "trivial", from that page is newspaper articles that simply report extended shopping hours or the publications of telephone numbers and addresses in business directories. None of the references I've provided are this, all of them discuss the company itself (or the founder as a notable businessman), some longer than others. TheQuandry 21:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- A more indepth interpretation of triviality can be found on the main notability page. (WP:N)Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 21:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- True, but AfD was brought up based on WP:V and WP:CORP. While CORP is a form of WP:N, it seems to be a bit different from the general notability policy. [1] TheQuandry 22:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Keep I believe the article satisfies WP:CORP. TSO1D 22:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I've added many more references to the main page. Much of Argo Tea's popularity is among college students, so a number of them are from University newspapers (all of them long standing and highly regarded). TheQuandry 02:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Seems to pass WP:V and WP:CORP now - it's a chain of tea shops in Chicago that has recieved media attention (and not just of the University press type either). Robovski 02:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per above. Frankly, I didn't realize they were that popular, but the sources in the article are good enough for me. Zagalejo 07:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep there's nothing like AfD to get an article sourced and notability established quickly.--Kchase T 07:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per Robovski. metaspheres 10:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. I first came upon this article today, and in its present state it seems obviously sourced, well-written, and notable. (Perhaps it wasn't before.) No, it's not a critically important article, but it's notable enough, and the article is nicely put together; it would be a shame to lose it. – Quadell (talk) (random) 13:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy keep and move on. Rich Farmbrough, 13:33 13 December 2006 (GMT).
- Keep per Quadell. Also, I've checked with friends in Chicago that seem to echo the sources used in the article (I know that counts as OR and I wouldn't put it in the article, but it at least show me that it is notable within America's third-largest city, FWIW). youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 14:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- 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.
