Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kinnucan's

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. Non-admin closure. --Jamie^☆S93 23:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kinnucan's

Kinnucan's (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This was listed as db-inc. This article has been around long enough with enough people working on it that I'm not sure that a speedy deletion would be appropriate. However, there is no claim of notability beyond total annual sales figures, and the article is pretty thin. Previous attempts at finding additional material were unsuccessful; see talk page discussion. On the other hand, there are at least some reliable sources, and it seems a reasonable stub. Blatant advertising and copyright violations were removed months ago. This is basically a procedural nomination.

• Note: This debate has been included in the
  ^Sing 16:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This debate has been included in the
  ^Sing 16:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep As stated on the talk page, I had a hard time finding outside sources for this article, but Nelson: Kinnucan's store keeps evolving is a fairly in depth article; discusses history, owner, store, etc. I think it could be turned into a fairly decent stub with a little work. - auburnpilot talk 16:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep per this source, which is very in-depth. Find more like it and I'd go for a solid keep. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 18:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Try these sources for your solid keep, TenPound: [1]
  talk) 18:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Most of those are about a golf tournament. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as sufficient reliable sources are available to cross the notability and verifiability thresholds. - Dravecky (talk) 00:37, 5 June 2008 (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.