Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vons


 * 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 speedy keep per WP:SNOW.  howcheng  {chat} 22:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Vons and other chains owned by Safeway Inc.

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Doesn't appear to meet notablity requirements, suggest merge with Safeway article. —  Dæ dαlusT@lk / Improve 16:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason as above. Note, any admins, users, please reformat as needed.—  Dæ dαlusT@lk / Improve 16:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)




 * Keep all These are major businesses about which readers might want to find some information. It doesn't matter who owns them. Borock (talk) 17:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment This isn't about who owns them, it's about whether they are notable or not. The only information listed in the articles is a basic history of the stores, the only notable thing I have been able to find is the company that bought all of them out, specifically, the banning of a certain type of plastic bag they used.—  Dæ dαlusT@lk / Improve 17:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep all I'm finding sources such as this, this, and this just for Vons alone. The information contained in each article seems like it could easily be sourced — lack of sources alone is no reason to delete. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 19:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep all, they're owned by Safeway, Inc. That's notability enough.   weburiedoursecrets  inthegarden  19:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note, No, it isn't, notablity is not transferable.—  Dæ dαlusT@lk / Improve 19:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Info Please see WP:NOTINHERITED.—  Dæ dαlusT@lk / Improve 19:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * keep all per all above commentsOo7565 (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep most names are very notable regional grocery chains, sources can be added. --Caldorwards4 (talk) 20:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep all. Just to cite one example, Dominick's, is well-referenced. At best this is a merger proposal, which does not require AFD. --Dhartung | Talk 20:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep all Different brands, different histories, all which could never be merged into the Safeway article and should not just because one company owns them all.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep all most are very notable regional grocery chains. -- Nsaum75 (talk) 21:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. I don't know why some people think that businesses, particularly chains of supermarkets, restaurants, etc. are automatically non-notable.  Wikipedia's notability requirements accommodate a wide variety of interests, whether one likes Pokemon toys or large employers. Mandsford (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and Immediate Close. Also consider warning the nominator not to make AfDs of clearly notable things. Bstone (talk) 22:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Did that already. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:10, 16 May 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.