Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Planet Pizza


 * 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   redirect to List of pizza chains of the United States. Daniel (talk) 01:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Planet Pizza

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to fail WP:CORPDEPTH. Not finding much coverage in reliable sources, let alone significant coverage. NorthAmerica1000 16:16, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 16:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 16:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 16:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete — Couldn't find a single reliable source covering the subject of this article. It's been tagged as completely unsourced since 2008, and should have been speedy deleted under (A7). Xenophrenic (talk) 18:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, I wondered whatever happened to that small chain. Delete as trivia. Bearian (talk) 16:39, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as unrefed with none found.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment to User:Mercurywoodrose: I see no justification for a speedy delete argument.  The article meets none of the criteria for speedy deletion in Criteria for speedy deletion (shortcut wp:CSD).  Having no references in the current article is not a Speedy argument.  In fact it, on its own, is not even really a valid criticism of an article--it is fine for Wikipedia to have stub articles on noteworthy topics.  I hope you take this as constructive criticism:  please take time to familiarize yourself with wp:CSD. -- do  ncr  am  18:38, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, so why dont you call xenophrenic to task, it was his idea, i was just echoing it. I almost never propose a CSD, and would not have done so here w/o others pointing out no refs for 6 years.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, sorry, i had not noticed xenophrenic's note about A7 criterion (no assertion of notability) possibly applying. I disagree that that criterion applied.  Actually the recent article history shows many back-and-forth edits with xenophrenic removing a lot of material, and with editor Northamerica1000 restoring it at least partially.  this version of the article showed considerably more content and context;  i think notability is fairly clearly suggested in that version.  Xenophrenic did in fact try to speedy delete it, but that was declined by Northamerica1000, properly IMO. -- do  ncr  am  19:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * P.S. "Strong Keep", "Strong Delete", "Weak Keep", Weak Delete" are other vote expressions to consider. Those are standard vote types that are counted up in the automated review of editors' AFD participations (where can we see that for u or me, i am not sure, i have seen these linked from RFAs sometimes i think). -- do  ncr  am  20:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Just a small clarification regarding what "recent article history shows":
 * with Xenophrenic removing a lot of completely unsourced material, and with editor Northamerica1000 restoring it without supplying a single citation 
 * The fact that the version to which you linked was completely unsourced (and dubious as well, after an in-depth search produced zero sourced corroboration of that content); that has been so since 2008; and has remained so after several removals with requests that sources be provided if reinstated -- shows it is indeed a candidate for speedy deletion, although one unfamiliar with the industry might argue not under (A7). Xenophrenic (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect (changed from Weak Keep, changed from Delete). Not withstanding my disagreement with "Speedy Delete" vote above, the nomination seems sound.  Thank you Northamerica1000 for performing wp:BEFORE.  Also I searched in newspaper databases behind paywall and found no mentions at all in the Wall Street Journal (searched from about 1985 on) or in the New York Times (historical), and no recent coverage besides a trivial mention, out of a bigger database of national newspapers.  So, it does seem not notable to me, unless someone comes up with some material. -- do  ncr  am  18:38, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * However, I change from "Delete" to "Weak Keep" for now based on seeing earlier version of the article which seems more substantial. Specifically that it was a major chain, a signicant competitor to Chuck E. Cheese's, a surviving chain that ended up acquiring many of Planet Pizza's stores.  With that much, though sources are not given, it seems to me that significant coverage at the time must have existed.  My own search of national news coverage was not of historical coverage, besides for WSJ and NYT.  The bankruptcy filing(s) would provide reliable coverage, for example.  Also searching in LATimes history and other western papers would be of help. -- do  ncr  am  19:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you intend to continue your search for sources, or are you offering suggestions in the hope that others might take up the endeavor? I'll watchlist this page in anticipation of someone having better luck than I did (after searching business records, bankruptcy records and newspapers local to the alleged founding location: Cupertino / Santa Clara County). Frankly, after reading the Talk page discussions about fiction intentionally introduced at that article page, I'm even beginning to suspect a hoax article built on a believable premise. Xenophrenic (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: If the article is not Kept, it would be better to redirect to List of pizza chains of the United States's section on defunct past chains, rather than to delete entirely.  That way the history would remain available at the redirect, and if/when someone comes with more sources it could be restored properly. -- do  ncr  am  22:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * A redirect to the list article should be acceptable. But probably not to the defunct section, as an actual non-notable, but still operating small chain exists: Planet Pizza. Xenophrenic (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay on a link to the list article in general not to the specific section. The California-based Planet Pizza and the Connecticut-based one can both be listed.
 * About more searching, i asked over at WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request and the quick reply by John M Baker is negative. I asked for LATimes search, and he did that and more.  Cupertino is not near LA, so i still think there can exist substantial coverage out there, but I am not finding it now.  Done for now. -- do  ncr  am  02:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as per all above. Problem with redirect is who would actually look for a Wikipedia article for that business? It's unnecessary. CesareAngelotti (talk) 18:13, 14 August 2014 (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.