Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kriser's Natural Pet (2nd nomination)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 01:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Kriser's Natural Pet
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable and promotional. The refs are either about the boutique pet food industry as a whole, or mere mentions, or PR. The previous AfD was closed no-consensus because nobody commented.  DGG ( talk ) 23:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: Full-article independent coverage in Denver Post, Crains, MainStreet.com (division of The Street), and so on. Major mentions in Bloomberg and Entrepreneur. One of Inc.'s 5000 for the past four years. Meets WP:GNG and WP:COMPANY. -- Softlavender (talk) 09:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Softlavender's links support notability —Мандичка YO 😜 09:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources provided, Seems notability's there. – Davey 2010 Talk 17:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - several articles, some of them with detailed coverage as mentioned above. But I took the liberty to trim some of the worst promo language. GermanJoe (talk) 21:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Scanning down the references I am wondering if folk have simply seen a list of refs and assumed they verify notability or have analysed them in any detail. I am finding regurgitated PR pieces and press releases, and at least one reference that does not even mention the org, I see this as WP:ADMASQ pure and simple. Fiddle   Faddle  22:17, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * We don't just rely on the haphazard references added by the article creator when determining a subject's notability. As I mentioned above, the company has full-article independent coverage in Denver Post, Crains, MainStreet.com (division of The Street), and so on. Major mentions in Bloomberg and Entrepreneur. One of Inc.-'s 5000 for the past four years. This is what we are basing our "Keep" votes on. Softlavender (talk) 00:04, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * And, of course you have added those references to the article, haven't you? Much more useful than telling is all about them, . One of my pet hates is people who list a load of putative references in a deletion discussion without troubling the article itself with them. Fiddle   Faddle  07:28, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * This is an WP:AFD – whose purpose is to decide whether the subject meets Wikipedia notability requirements and merits inclusion or deletion – not a request to improve the article. You are free to improve the article; but that is not the focus of an AFD discussion. Softlavender (talk) 08:01, 15 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per Softlavender. The articles in Bloomberg, the Denver Post, the Chicago Tribune and Houston Business Journal aren't PR releases. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2015 (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.