Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristian Regale


 * 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   no consensus.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 01:43, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Kristian Regale

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Real product, possibly popular, not notable. There is no significant coverage, and there is little hope of expanding this article past ingredients, sizes, and availability. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  02:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak delete No indication of wp:notability.  The only source is a press release.  "Weak" is because the article is only 4-5 month old and may just need better editors.  It's a real company and the article is at least partially encyclopedic. North8000 (talk) 02:57, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 15:06, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, weakly. This business makes sparkling fruit juice products. Unfortunately, I only find directory listings and press releases.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 22:03, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep its not an advertisement but has some historical valueRachelskit (talk) 21:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Google News search shows several RS discussing the company. --Tgeairn (talk) 03:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Did you actually look at those sources? There are press releases and trivial mentions in lists of drinks/foods, or mentions of events where this was offered as a beverage. This beverage exists and people have consumed it, but there is no significant coverage there. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  03:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't go beyond the payblocks for the news archive sites, but the summaries appeared to be references to the company by editorial staff of print newspapers and the like. Without asserting anything they may have said about the company, it at least appears to me that there is RS coverage of the existence of the company. While the WP:CORPDEPTH is slim (from what I can see), there is some breadth of independent third-party coverage. It at least indicates that the company has attracted notice of third-party sources, which is the standard for WP:CORP. --Tgeairn (talk) 04:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 05:18, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 23:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Last relist.
 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B  music  ian  01:56, 5 March 2012 (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.