Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lambert & Butler


 * 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) &mdash;  Yash! (Y) 03:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Lambert & Butler

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I found this article while searching for articles that needing cleaning and I don't think it is notable. Recent news results don't find anything significant or notable as well as archived results with only one link here saying it is the best-selling brand in the UK similiar to the 2007 claim in the article. Books results don't find anything good either, Newspapers archive found nothing and a search at British newspapers Telegraph and Guardian found nothing aside from some BBC results. Frankly, as an alternative to deletion, I think redirecting to Imperial Tobacco would be good since it seems Lambert & Butler is best known for that. Any comments? SwisterTwister  talk  04:56, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't know why this article takes 1979 as a starting point when Lambert & Butler as a company dates back to 1834 when they were one the UK's earliest cigar manufacturers . The company had a 67 year history before merging with Imperial Tobacco in 1901. There's clearly scope for expansion here with sources such as, , . A brand that had 17% of the cigarette market in the UK in 1999 with sales of £1.3billion in 2009 is clearly worth including in an encyclopedia. --Michig (talk) 07:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep and add sources In addition to what Michig said, this is a stub that is barely changed from its creation in 2005: such an old article requires some careful research at the normal sources before a nomination. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per everyone above - Sources for 1800-1980s related articles are generally next to impossible to find which is why leniency is given on these, and plus This is one of the major cigarette brands in the UK, IMHO it simply needs expanding not deleting. – Davey 2010 Talk 15:43, 1 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.