Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Admiral (gambling)


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:08, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Admiral (gambling)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Not responding WP:NCORP. Mambo Rumbo (talk) 07:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 14:41, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * . Admiral is a chain of casinos with over 50 years of history and hundreds of locations, though it was previously under different names. Reliable sources are sure to exist. No WP:BEFORE diligence has been done. Possibly should be merged with Quicksilver (company), but would need further research to say for sure. Toohool (talk) 17:41, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Changed to Speedy Keep. Nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet, and the IP below appears to be another of his socks. Part of a rapid-fire mass nomination of gambling companies. Toohool (talk) 22:14, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:57, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete poor sourcing. NCORP says: An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable. If no independent, third-party, reliable sources can be found on a topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it. --24.138.27.215 (talk) 10:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep The article has been much expanded since the nomination. This sort of company tends to be publicity-shy, so the coverage could ideally be more in-depth. Nonetheless, with 200 high street gambling venues in the UK as well as gambling websites, it is important that we have an article about it. Edwardx (talk) 10:57, 2 November 2022 (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.