Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReaperAle Brewing Company

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. No arguments for this article's inclusion have been made. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 16:09, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ReaperAle Brewing Company

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

Non-notable brewery. ~~References provide a few passing mentions in the Los Angeles Times, nothing more. I could find no sources in a search.~~ Sorry, I misstated. Actually the article references provide no independent reliable sources; in a search I found a couple of passing mentions in the LA Times. Declined prod. MelanieN (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete - I cannot find coverage to establish notability. Can the nominator share the LA Times references? I see none in the article, nor did I find any in my own searches. -- Whpq (talk) 17:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found two passing mentions at the LA Times: [1] [2] (I sure miss Google News Archive, don't you?) --MelanieN (talk) 19:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links. They are passing mentions as one beer out of a list of beers. That's well short of significant. -- Whpq (talk) 21:44, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Typical article for non notable brewery insufficient reliable sources, becausethere's nothing betterto be found. 'DGG (at NYPL)' (talk) 19:01, 27 January 2014 (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.