Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomson Directories
- 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 under WP:SNOW. There's a clear, evidence-based consensus that Thomson Directories are notable in the United Kingdom, and I see no realistic prospect of anyone demonstrating otherwise. AfD is busy and other articles desperately need participation from experienced Wikipedians, and I see no ongoing discussion to finish, so the benefits of a snow closure now seem to me to outweigh the drawbacks.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 12:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC) [reply]
- Thomson Directories (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I declined the {{db-spam}} nomination, so I'm bringing it here for further evaluation. I remain neutral. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:38, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.
- Keep. I added two references. More can be found here. -- Eastmain (talk) 02:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, but rewrite so it isn't an advertisement. Awickert (talk) 04:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep: passes WP:N..South Bay (talk) 07:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep it is not necessary to bring something here when one declines a speedy, unless one thinks it ought to be deleted. DGG ( talk ) 08:36, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - definitely notable in England, a copy in pretty much every home in the country. Canterbury Tail talk 11:19, 15 August 2009 (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.