- 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. --- Deville (Talk) 21:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NN Not notable-organization (speedy was contested) abakharev 02:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Bit silly to contest speedy, all told. I mean, it was so blatantly not a speedy that nobody could have been faulted for just removing the tag altogether. While I'm bashing your ears, could I get you to kinda not use AfD jargon like "NN", which makes no sense to the outsiders who occasionally cross bravely into our territory to plead their suit? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 02:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Just for the record, it was not me who put the speedy tag on the article. It was me who put it to AfD instead of deleting while clearing the CSD backlog abakharev 04:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- For the record, it was me who put the speedy tag on the article, albeit an earlier version. I tagged it as nocontext; however, the article has since been improved somewhat. -- Merope 12:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Even then it could not have been called a speedy candidate. Please be more careful. Improperly tagging stuff has two main side-effects: firstly, for no good reason it pisses off the person who first wrote the article; secondly, we have some admins (silly sausages to a man!) who think it's their duty to delete anything so tagged, however ridiculous the deletion argument may be (this could be as a result of the concerted efforts of certain CVUers to follow up on admin talkpages and complain that they're not following orders). In both cases, Bad. 137.92.97.114 04:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- For the record, it was me who put the speedy tag on the article, albeit an earlier version. I tagged it as nocontext; however, the article has since been improved somewhat. -- Merope 12:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Just for the record, it was not me who put the speedy tag on the article. It was me who put it to AfD instead of deleting while clearing the CSD backlog abakharev 04:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Company does not appear to be particularly notable, but the film series it distributes in the US is (with it's own WP article). Company does have a IMDB listing. Article appears not to be written by an employee, but a fan. Lots of room for improvement though. Seaphoto 01:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I haven't heard of the company, but some of the movies they're claimed to be distributing are somewhat infamous, so that may count towards a keep. Mark Grant 02:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Notable horror DVD distributor (e.g. turns up in a search of Fangoria.com, DVDs can be found in stores, etc.), whether that's sufficiently notable to be encyclopedic material, I don't know. Шизомби 15:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Distributor of notable films. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 02:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep seems some what notable, but needs improvement. - Chelsea
- 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.