Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City Furniture

Add links
Source: 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 delete. Sandstein 11:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

City Furniture

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

City Furniture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NCORP. It was deleted twice. Created for the third time by Candleabracadabra, a puppet of a long-term sock. The article also carries a strong promotional tone. Graywalls (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

comment for closer - this may have been eligible for speedy deletion under CSD G5. I didn't realize at the time it was created. Graywalls (talk) 13:57, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but the promotional tone needs to be removed indeed. It has decorated some well known people homes, so that gives an indication of notability (it's inherited, so *indication*) Dwaro (talk) 11:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
reply it specifically says in the criteria notability CAN NOT be
INHERITED. This reasoning is not consistent with policy. It should be noted that your recent batch of contributions have been exclusive and restricted to AfDs I have participated in over articles in area you do not participate in at all. Graywalls (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes, but citing "The organization or corporation itself must have been discussed in reliable independent sources for it to be considered notable." is the case in the Huffington post, after they decorated a home of Kardashian family members. (I'm just giving a single example here). Also, I'm here to improve the encyclopedia, nothing else. I think this article about a notable orga should not be deleted. I also like to note that the previous deletion of this article was 12 years ago. Although I can't see the old article, I think this one is probably a lot better. Dwaro (talk) 14:14, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Name the specific sources you find to entirely meet sourcing standards. A celebrity gossip article talked about notable people going shopping at a place, and that place happened to be City Furniture. That article was specifically about the actions of the notable person(s) and where they went shopping is just a side thought. This article was deleted not once, but twice. Your basis for the speculation that the current version is better is nothing more than just a gut feel. It's about as valid as a claim a glass of water poured today is "probably a lot better" than what it tasted like a week go without having had a chance to try it the week before. Graywalls (talk) 08:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/City_Furniture&oldid=959354173"