The result was speedy keep. I'm withdrawing the nomination. in light of the additional source. DGG ( talk ) 17:58, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Very borderline notability--LA Times is not necessarily a sufficient source for notability for a LA local company. Clearly promotional as well DGG ( talk ) 04:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
* Keep: Don't think it's 'very borderline' of itself – it's a $100m plus business, according to LA Times, and a reference from there has some validity, local company or not. Agree, it needs some strengthening and I've added two further refs (Orange County Register, different story LA Times) and put more focus onto current business ops rather than history. It might be useful to flag up the bits that are 'clearly promotional' so they can be adjusted/lost. Would have thought an improve flag was more appropriate as a first step here so oppose a deletion until this article has had more time to be improved. Libby norman ( talk) 09:36, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
The result was speedy keep. I'm withdrawing the nomination. in light of the additional source. DGG ( talk ) 17:58, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Very borderline notability--LA Times is not necessarily a sufficient source for notability for a LA local company. Clearly promotional as well DGG ( talk ) 04:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
* Keep: Don't think it's 'very borderline' of itself – it's a $100m plus business, according to LA Times, and a reference from there has some validity, local company or not. Agree, it needs some strengthening and I've added two further refs (Orange County Register, different story LA Times) and put more focus onto current business ops rather than history. It might be useful to flag up the bits that are 'clearly promotional' so they can be adjusted/lost. Would have thought an improve flag was more appropriate as a first step here so oppose a deletion until this article has had more time to be improved. Libby norman ( talk) 09:36, 1 April 2014 (UTC)