Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rogers Ltd., Inc.

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 Delete. Nishkid64 01:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rogers Ltd., Inc.

Rogers Ltd., Inc. (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

Midwestern jewellery chain, speedy deletion was overturned at deletion review, sending it here for further discussion. This is a procedural nomination, I have no opinion. ~ trialsanderrors 00:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Advertisement. No sources given. - Ocatecir 02:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete for above reasons Shaundakulbara 02:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No sources. No assertion or evidence of notability. No attempt to comply with WP:CORP. --Shirahadasha 04:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable local company. Montco 06:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per above. ← ANAS ^Talk? 06:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No sources, and advertisement. Daniel5127 <Talk> 07:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete reads like an advert that fails to assert notability which qualifies the articles for speedy deletion under A7 and G11. Would be happy to reconsider if issues were addressed. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per the above reasons. S.D. ¿п? § 12:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:CORP JCO312 15:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Note: I've expanded the article to include more information on company size (which I think makes it notable),including an external reference. I don't know if this will make the article more up to standard, but I appreciate you taking a second look User:Jh75
• Delete still does not meet notability criteria in my view Johnbod 17:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. What this article needs is sources. Writing about the store in multiple nontrivial sources. The external reference added doesn't seem to qualify. -FisherQueen (Talk) 18:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• delete Not relevant to Wikipedia, it would be if it was more of a widely known company. Tellyaddict 19:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - While I am familiar with this chain because of its local ads, there is no assertion of notability in the article. Recommend exclusion as per WP:NOT#DIR. Ronbo76 14:15, 26 January 2007 (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.