Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pemberton Distillery

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pemberton Distillery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Delete. Non-notable company. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pemberton Distillery is a highly unique distillery. I am attempting to create the page from a neutral stand point. I believe that many people would be interested to read about our distillery from a scientific stand point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tschramm (talk • contribs) 21:04, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep—Coverage in reliable sources: [1] [2] [3] [4] — however, the article creator should be very careful if he/she is at all associated with the company. Perhaps ask for help at WP:COIN. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 21:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Having searched wikipedia extensively, there are many entries for Distilleries and many much less notable than Pemberton Distillery. I believe a precedence has been established, that as long as the entry is aimed at public information/scientific knowledge than an entry for a distillery is acceptable. comment added by Tschramm (talk tschramm (talk) 20:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Bearcat (talk) 06:26, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sources are present in the article, so keep. But that is a question of the presence of sources, and not just a question of "other distilleries have articles, so this one can too" — if sources weren't present, this article couldn't be kept no matter what else does or doesn't exist. Bearcat (talk) 17:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - found two non-local sources and added both to article.Marikafragen (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2012 (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.