Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graffiti Blasters

Graffiti Blasters

Non-notable local program. Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 01:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - It technically meets the inclusion criteria because the trademark controversy has received coverage, I think the program itself has recieved some as well. While I'm not sure there's enough there to build a decent article, it does meet WP:N, so there is at least some usable information. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 02:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep We have Philadelphia Anti-Graffiti Network, so why not Chicago. Alternatively both could be merged with the weak & oddly named Graffiti abatement. Johnbod (talk) 03:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per above. Seems to meet WP:N. -Thibbs (talk) 14:09, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
weak delete. Where is the trademark controversy in the article? SYSS Mouse (talk) 01:52, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Local government painting over graffiti doesn't look particularly significant. But there are several sources addressing the specific program: [1], [2], [3], [4].--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WEEEAAAK Keep Topicwise, I do not understand why it is encyclopedic at the international level. It seems like a local government program. However, Ethicoaestheticist has convinced me it is WP:N according to our guidelines.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]