- 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 Speedy Keep by withdrawal of nomination. (Non Admin Closure) Eduemoni↑talk↓ 18:34, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- SV Angel (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)
primary source only, no indication given of notability. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Mikemoral♪♫ 21:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. —Mikemoral♪♫ 21:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I actually found coverage in some national sources including Fortune magazine and the New York Times. I added several references to the article. --MelanieN (talk) 01:30, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdraw nomination and speedy keep, well done. I should have tried myself, 40 lashes with a wet noodle.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:42, 25 June 2013 (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.