- 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. postdlf ( talk) 19:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
- Iwan Ries and Co. ( | 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 claim of notability Jackmcbarn ( talk) 20:11, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - First off, "one of the oldest family owned tobacco companies in North America" (per the article) is certainly a claim of notability. Secondly, the topic passes WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples include:
- – Northamerica1000 (talk) 02:12, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep I'd call it WP:GNG rather than CORPDEPTH, but it is the same thing.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 02:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Keep meets WP:GNG, WP:ORG. Article includes multiple in-depth mentions in reliable sources. Iniciativass ( talk) 15:51, 10 February 2014 (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.
- 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. postdlf ( talk) 19:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
- Iwan Ries and Co. ( | 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 claim of notability Jackmcbarn ( talk) 20:11, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - First off, "one of the oldest family owned tobacco companies in North America" (per the article) is certainly a claim of notability. Secondly, the topic passes WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples include:
- – Northamerica1000 (talk) 02:12, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep I'd call it WP:GNG rather than CORPDEPTH, but it is the same thing.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 02:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Keep meets WP:GNG, WP:ORG. Article includes multiple in-depth mentions in reliable sources. Iniciativass ( talk) 15:51, 10 February 2014 (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.