Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaseholm Farm Creamery


 * 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. Michig (talk) 07:55, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Chaseholm Farm Creamery

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable firm, and the article reads like a press release (tho I think it was a class project). The only non-local RS is the coverage as one of the companies mentioned in the Modern Farmer article.  DGG ( talk ) 01:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:07, 27 February 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep coverage exists and the article is not perfect but not bad enough to be a reason for deletion. Peter James (talk) 09:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:59, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Web search shows a significant number of sources, not all of which are local and not all of which are currently in the article. The farm is mentioned in several articles about modern farming or artisanal cheese production. Their farm also appears notable as its product is being marketed throughout the New York City area, including by Whole Foods. Quality of existing article is not a reason for deletion if reliable source support exists and the article could be improved. TheBlinkster (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as having enough sourcing to pass WP:GNG. VMS Mosaic (talk) 08:56, 11 March 2016 (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.