Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Smoothie

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 was keep. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 05:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Smoothie

Mr. Smoothie (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Strong Delete - Sick and tired of seeing this type of advertising article on this encyclopedia. Maybe we have forgotten what we actually are? Markanthony101 (talk) 20:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Weak keep. I don't see how this is advertising; it simply states that it's a franchise with locations in several states. I'd say that just about any multi-state franchise would have a certain degree of notability, although I'm having a hard time finding any reliable sources for this one. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 21:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Sorry, even though they span eight states (soon to be nine; not bad for only 21 locations total), I just can't find a single reliable third-party source for this chain. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • keep AfD is for irredeemable articles. This meets notability, it just needs expansion. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 22:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep - Nominated by now-indefinitely blocked user. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep per SchuminWeb. (Reluctantly - this doesn't look particularly notable to me, but he's right, banned users are not supposed to initiate AFDs.) Terraxos (talk) 04:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per lack of independent reliable sourcing attesting to notability. Otto4711 (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 02:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Please note that despite the nominator being a banned person, I will allow this AfD to continue since this is a valid AfD itself, and the fact there is a notability concern in this article means that this AfD is not made in bad faith. Please comment on this AfD as if it was an AfD initiated by any user in good-standing. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 02:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

My deletion has been contested. See this: [1]

In fact, proposing this and other articles for deletion brought me to the powerful wrath of Mr. Schumin's friends. I say the admin hierarchy has no right to do what it has done. Have a look for yourself to see just how corrupt and downright wrong that decision was. Markanthony102 (talk) 14:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete per lack of sources to establish notability. --Veritas (talk) 16:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak keep sufficiently notable large multi state franchise.DGG (talk) 08:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak keep- notable, but a stub article. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 00:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC) (Disclaimer: I am currently involved in a dispute with the nominator)
  • keep, bad article, needs background, but company is notable.Beach drifter (talk) 20:10, 6 February 2008 (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.