Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conrad-johnson

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 the debate was Keep move and expand Eluchil404 00:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conrad-johnson

Non notable organization. abakharev 05:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, spam.--Andeh 05:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Take another look, please. I think its notability is demonstrated by the independent coverage of the company's products. See the Sources section of the article, which was added after the two comments above. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 07:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Quite notable.--Tdxiang 07:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep, seems at least marginally notable based on the coverage. Needs some heavy cleanup and a move to Conrad-Johnson, though. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 07:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable per above. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep notable but needs serious expansion. -Seidenstud 06:27, 5 July 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.