Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compass Tours (2nd nomination)

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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compass Tours

This article was nominated for deletion before, but still does not assert much notability. The only sources are from a local paper. -- JediLofty ^{Talk to me}_{Follow me} 16:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on the ref's provided, and additional ghits beyond blurbs & blogs. Arakunem^Talk 17:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Only three months since it was last put up for deletion (by myself). There are references, and the article was improved (just) since it was nominated last time around. The lack of any prior discussion on the talk page weakens the argument for this being removed. Olana North (talk) 18:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (as I argued in the previous AfD). The article meets the general notability guideline standard of receiving coverage in independent reliable sources—it does not need to "assert" something beyond that. Local coverage is fine, as long as it is independent. The article by Vicky Anderson is an article entirely about this company, and there is a fair amount of verifiable info that can still be added from that. In addition to the articles in the Liverpool Daily Post, there is also coverage in the Liverpool Echo and in The Railway Magazine (see this Google News search.) Unfortunately I do not have access to the full text of the last one, so I am not sure how extensive that coverage is. Anyway, there's enough to meet WP:GNG, though it would be nice to have more. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Notability is confirmed via WP:RS, though admittedly this is a marginal case. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article passed with a keep decision only a couple of months ago and that decision should stand for now. Articles must not be renominated in such a short period of time before a desired outcome occurs. 23skidoo (talk) 22:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.