Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bedder 6


 * 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 03:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Bedder 6
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I am the author of this article which has been put up for speedy deletion three times by the same editor. Two different editors have decided it does not meet the spam speedy criteria. Following the removal of the third speedy, the same editor has put a Prod tag on the article. If there are concerns about this topic's notability, then I want a debate to be held rather than repeated attempts at automated deletion. AlexJ (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - As article starter and nominator, I believe that the article is completely factual, by citing multiple independent reliable sources. AlexJ (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand Easily meets WP:V with reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 23:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per TenPoundHammer - D.M.N. (talk) 07:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 11:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Very Weak Keep I agree it isn't Spam and attempting to PROD it wasn't the best thing from a behaviour standoint but... I can't really agree that the article as it stands belongs in wikipedia (I don't believe the references cover the subject of the article in a significant manner, neither the tone nor the setup of the article are particularly encyclopedic either); however, these are probably reasons to tag the article for cleanup, notability, etc and not to delete. Jasynnash2 (talk) 13:03, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Whilst this company has received reocognition and press coverage due to it's assosiaton with someone independantly notable, the coverage is still there. In my opinion the referenecs listed are enough about Bedder 6 and not just Clarkson. Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:06, 12 September 2008 (UTC) keep
 * Me need to learn to spell proper, sorry Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   — treelo  radda  21:35, 13 September 2008 (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.