Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slumberland Furniture


 * 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) SST flyer 14:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Slumberland Furniture

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails GNG CerealKillerYum (talk) 06:01, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm going to tentatively say Delete, fails WP:ORG as-is. Tpdwkouaa (talk) 17:28, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as I found some links but this is still questionable. SwisterTwister   talk  05:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep – The company meets WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples include, but are not limited to:, , , , , , , , ,.


 * Note that many of these sources provide significant additional background and contemporary information about the company beyond the headline titles of the articles. Also of note is that per WP:NEXIST, "Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article". North America1000 10:57, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting to allow time for evaluation of the sources presented here. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2016 (UTC) Keep North America is right. It does clearly meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Hard to think of many retailers with 125 stores across 12 states that would not be notable. Edwardx (talk) 21:09, 28 March 2016 (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.