Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antiquorum Auctioneers


 * 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. John254 01:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Antiquorum Auctioneers

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not quite a speedy-deletable ad, but it's sure addish. No real claims of notability. Corvus cornix (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep This is one of the the principal watch auction houses. Sources are all over the shop. Article does read like an add, needs work, like most. scope_creep (talk) 19:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems to have decent sources and claims to notability (first to auction watches over the Internet, for one). Tagged for cleanup and references. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 19:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep It has reliable sources and a small claim to notability. Karanacs (talk) 20:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This Where's the problem. It's notable and factual. It might not be very "good" as an article but that's not a problem - it could be improved.  M♠ssing  Ace   23:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Can this be serious- front page story in Wall Street Journal doesn't establish notability?  95 other stories, etc.  Wikidemo (talk) 21:03, 21 November 2007 (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.