Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juice It Up!


 * 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. In addition to a clear consensus to keep, the nominator withdrew their nomination without any opposing delete !votes or active discussion between editors. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Juice It Up!

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Multiple sources do not provide evidence of notability WP:CORPDEPTH for this corporate advertisement. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:31, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  05:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  05:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  05:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, subject has received significant coverage in multiple non-primary reliable sources such as Los Angeles Times, QSR Magazine, and Smart Business, and therefore meets WP:GNG as well as WP:ORG. Furthermore the company has links to other reliable sources regarding itself.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep; needs rewriting to be less advertisement more article, but seems to meet notability. Cheers, LindsayHello 05:51, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep: Notable per above. SL93 (talk) 01:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep A factual adequately sourced article about a company. I wish that all  articles on this sort of subject were like this one.  DGG ( talk ) 15:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Clearly passes GNG from footnotes showing. I really hate the way footnotes[1][4][5][7] are stacked[2][3][4][6][9], but whatcha gonna do??? Carrite (talk) 05:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Withdraw AfD Nom Out of deference to clear consensus above. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per above, it does need work and nominator withdrew. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:32, 8 June 2013 (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.