Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ontario Pork


 * 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. -Royalguard11 (T·R!) 23:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Ontario Pork

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not a particularly notable organization, and the article is basically advertising. PKT (talk) 15:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup -- clearly notable if you're a pig and probably notable if you're not:
 * Google News search: several mentions of the organization among more generic uses of the phrase "Ontario pork"
 * Google News archive search: many more press mentions, once again scattered among more generic uses of the phrase
 * -- A. B. (talk) 15:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletions.  -- A. B. (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletions.  -- A. B. (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletions.  -- A. B. (talk) 15:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. We need a good article on this important marketing board . Double Blue  (Talk) 16:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I live in Ontario, and I like pork/ham/bacon/backbacon, but I question the importance of the board. In fact, this article indicates it is losing or has lost ground in the marketplace.  PKT (talk) 16:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I read that article differently but really the importance is off-topic. I should have merely noted instead that it meets WP:V and does not meet WP:DP. Double Blue  (Talk) 21:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I read that article differently but really the importance is off-topic. I should have merely noted instead that it meets WP:V and does not meet WP:DP. Double Blue  (Talk) 21:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: I've expanded slightly with references. Much more can be done. Double Blue  (Talk) 00:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * If the article survives, it should be moved to an accurate title. PKT (talk) 13:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per very nice, concise cleanup by User:DoubleBlue. Any organization that gets a book written about it called Men and Pork Chops deserves a WP article. :-)  Recommend a retitle though, as it's about the association and not the actual pigmeat, just for clarification.  Not that anyone would write an article about the pigmeat...How about Ontario Pork Producers' Marketing Board with Ontario Pork as a searchable redirect?   Keeper   |   76  17:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I agree with PKT and you about moving it to Ontario Pork Producers’ Marketing Board as that appears to still be the name in legislation with Ontario Pork as a redirect since that is the name they use for marketing purposes and is often referred to by in the media. Double Blue  (Talk) 02:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * keep & move  - looks good after the cleanup & agree to the sensible move. Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  06:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep  Appears notable, per the above points. -- Shark face  217  02:05, 17 December 2007 (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.