Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soor Plooms


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 20:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Soor Plooms

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I created this article, but I can't determine from the sources whether it is truly notable. Generates a considerable number of Google Scholar and Google Books results, and featured in an Oor Wullie cartoon, but I'm not convinced about notability. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 23:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems like every time I create a new article, I have notability doubts, and nominate my own new articles for deletion regularly. Is this necessarily a bad thing?--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 23:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Verifiable and notable enough.  --Lockley (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  00:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  -- Hiding T 23:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep For borderline notability, I am inclined to keep until there is convincing evidence that this can't be expanded. I have added a couple more historic facts to the article. –Pomte 09:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's definitely better now. I just wasn't sure how to wire the source information available into the article, and you've done it well. My initial doubts arose considering whether the coverage is more than trivial, but it definitely is, and it's not advertising for a brand-name product in any way. Definitely notable and this AfD should be closed as keep.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 22:14, 2 January 2008 (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.