Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toymaster


 * 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. No prejudice against a quick (but not speedy) renomination if sourcing isn't found. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:28, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Toymaster

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

While there seems to be a bit of coverage on Highbeam, I didn't find enough to established depth of coverage per WP:CORP. Usually the company is mentioned incidentally in articles discussing other topics. Further, it has been unsourced aside from primary sources since inception, and has been rewritten in the past to sound promotional by someone presumably involved with the company (see the very short article history). S Æ don talk 00:20, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:21, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep they apparently have over 250 locations. It seems unfathomable for a business to be that large and not have reliable sources out there somewhere.  It does look like some spamming has occurred in the article, but we can't delete solely on that basis alone. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  11:35, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Patently notable. Ou tis (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Notability is demonstrated by coverage in reliable sources. Perhaps I was looking in the wrong place, but I found nothing substantial. Perhaps you could point me in the right direction and we can improve the article before the AFD finishes.  S Æ don talk 22:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Since a couple editors have expressed that they believe this topic is notable, I've added it to the article rescue squadren's rescue list with the hopes that they'll be able to help out. Thanks.  S Æ don talk 22:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. S Æ don talk 22:15, 17 June 2012 (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.