Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Starbucks Workers Union


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 06:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Starbucks Workers Union
Importance and notability has not been established Luke 04:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice to future articles. The current is a copy-paste job of http://www.starbucksunion.org/about, so I can't agonize over it: easy come, easy go. Melchoir 04:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per JChap2007's rewriting. Melchoir 16:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, its not an official union by Starbucks itself, and notability is not established. --Ter e nce Ong (T 05:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, after JChap2007's rewrite. Rewrite includes verifiability and notability. --Ter e nce Ong (T 08:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep It's not certified, but it was an object of curiosity in the media and has actually received coverage in multiple articles. See,  and .  Thus, it meets WP:ORG. JChap2007 08:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per JChap2007 if someone can bother to kill the copy-paste job and write a real article. - Mgm|(talk) 08:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * And I rewrote it. JChap2007 12:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Version I read establishes news coverage and at least historical interest; some people may not suspect that the Wobblies even still exist.  Suggest AfD is moot, in that the article has been rewritten by JChap2007. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, current version is okish. Addhoc 15:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep BEcause Luke is a starbucks manager!!! just kidding, keep because its notability has been established through the sources provided of media coverage. -- zero faults   ' '' 16:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep the rewrite by JChap2007, notability looks to be firmly established now. RFerreira 19:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems very notable. JASpencer 22:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per the very good rewrite. :) There's apparently a good deal of third party (historic and media) interest and it's verified.  Srose  (talk)  22:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Richardcavell 22:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly an aritcle that was useful as it explains a point about labour relations at a major company (this is valuable information). Afd was unwarranted in the first place, a rewrite should have been requested instead. Nlsanand 01:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Nlsanand. CindyLooWho 06:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Legitimate article about legitimate union organisation Athryn 15:27, 24 August 2006 (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.