Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West 49

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] West 49

West 49 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

The article reads like an advertisement. I couldn't glean notability from Google because of "noise," so I'm inviting Canadians to chime in on this. YechielMan 18:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Weak Keep - seems like a notable company in Canada and sponsors skateboarding events. Article desperately needs more detail and context though. Eddie.willers 20:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. I know we need more than just anecdotal evidence, but I am from Canada and West 49 does seem intuitively notable enough to have an article written about it. There are articles going back six years about it: [1]. There is also more information available than just a mere description of the chain (the link I posted is one example). I might work on this article later. Here's another: [2] Sancho (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete for now, but I'll reconsider if it gets more sources. Realkyhick 21:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Change to keep. The author did as I asked. Realkyhick 16:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Extremely notable in canada, kinda like THE urban store. George Leung 00:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Weak delete - Never heard of it, but George Leung obviously had - reads like an advertisement, however, someone should of just tried to speedy it under db-spam, if they didn't. It definitely does, however, read like an advertisement. BlackBear 13:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep because I just added a bunch of references and made it not read like spam. Sancho (talk) 14:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep after improvements and added references. JavaTenor 19:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep, author is putting some considerable work into improving the article, we should give him the chance to do so. The work so far has reduced the advertizing aspect well enough to avoid deletion, IMO. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 14:52, 28 March 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.