Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tokyo Smoke


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 01:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Tokyo Smoke

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Small -- hell, tiny -- Toronto retailer. It's claims to fame are as "the first brand in Canada to partner with a medical-marijuana producer to offer legally branded Cannabis" and "the first Canadian cannabis consumer brand to raise capital" -- neither of which milestones has attracted any real attention. Calton | Talk 18:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Gnews does reveal some good results, including this story from Canada's biggest national newspaper, this from the US-based Sprudge, this from BlogTO, to choose three of the strongest. These are in addition to the cites on the article, and indeed most but not all of those could be dismissed as routine or affiliated coverage. But taken all together, I think the coverage meets WP:ORG as well as WP:AUD. Keep. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:33, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Tentative keep -- The Globe & Mail; plus the brand is apparently being discussed as a firm representative of the "green bubble": Calgary Sun: "Wilson is among several market backers who recently invested $3 million in Vancouver-based Tokyo Smoke, which wants to become the Starbucks of cannabis." So could be a touch of WP:TOOSOON, but likely that the notability would continue and increase in the future with various legalisation initiatives going on. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:52, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. as essentially an advertisement.  DGG ( talk ) 04:13, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 07:20, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - There is enough in the references to convince me that this retailer is of at least marginal notability. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball 07:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Tentative keep – originator needs to add in the additional news sources we've found, and it needs to be given a going-over to remove any promotional material, but fundamentally the topic seems (marginally) notable per guidelines. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:29, 5 February 2017 (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.