Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O.b. (brand)
- 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)
O.b. (brand)
- O.b. (brand) (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)
No references. Not independently notable Rathfelder (talk) 19:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the talk) 19:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)]
- Note: This debate has been included in the talk) 19:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)]
- Note: This debate has been notified to WikiProject Women. Voceditenore (talk) 17:36, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- Keep a very well-known brand with a 66-year history. I have expanded it and added further references in addition to the two lengthy articles in the German press which were added by another editor yesterday. Voceditenore (talk) 17:13, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: o.b. is a well-known brand; I'm surprised there wasn't a Wikipedia page on them sooner. Funcrunch (talk) 00:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - Longstanding highly recognizable brand. Not surprisingly after only a couple of seconds I found these examples of significant coverage. .[1][2][3] I'm sure I'd find much more if I bothered actually trying. No references in an article of a notable topic is a matter of regular editing, as excellently done so far by Voceditenore, not deletion. --Oakshade (talk) 04:05, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
- Much improved. Keep it.Rathfelder (talk) 08:48, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Rathfelder: Since you're the nominator and no one has voted to delete, you can withdraw the nomination and close as speedy keep, per AfD instructions. Funcrunch (talk) 16:42, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
- Never done that before!Rathfelder (talk) 22:34, 13 December 2016 (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.