Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wurzburg's


 * 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 Delete  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  17:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Wurzburg's
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Local store that doesn't seem to establish notability. Wizardman 15:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete The chain went under in the 1970s, and it only comprised six or seven stores, so I doubt that there will be much about it on the 'Net. However, I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility of some good sources being found in a newspaper archive search. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 15:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as above. Not notable per WP:CORP. Eusebeus (talk) 16:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete, remnant of an era when every mid-sized city had its own native department store, sometimes with regional branches. namecheck here About the only online RS in any depth is this obit of the onetime owner. I'd advocate a merge if I could find the chain it merged with, but I can't find a trace of it after the 1970s. --Dhartung | Talk 20:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think it merged with anyone, given that each store was converted to a different name. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 20:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Very weak delete, needs WP:HEY. Close cal here, additional sources would change my vote. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 21:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep "notability is not teporary" cant remember where it says that, but it does somewhere....--Camaeron (talk) 21:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 03:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Needs WP:HEY, but I'm not yet convinced it's sufficiently non-notable enough to delete. I'd say that these were notable, at that time in those locations, but it's hard to tell. Mostlyharmless (talk) 07:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   —Pixelface (talk) 19:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as there are no reliable sources to demonstrate notability.--Gavin Collins (talk) 21:11, 11 March 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.