Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AC Moore

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 Closing per WP:SNOW as a keep, non admin close.. Umbralcorax (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AC Moore

Non-notable per WP:COMPANY. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This company has reliable third-party coverage, including precisely the kind of financial profiles described on WP:COMPANY. I've reworked the prose a little and added some references of that sort. Avram (talk) 08:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Avram, plenty of sources exist, see here. Retail articles on Wikipedia tend to be sucky, because clearly, NOBODY WILL HELP ME IMPROVE THEM. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 11:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This company has reliable third-party coverage, including precisely the kind of financial profiles described on WP:COMPANY. I've reworked the prose a little and added some references of that sort. Avram (talk) 08:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable to be sure. [1] noted in NYTimes article on retailing slump in 2002, [2] described as national chain in "big box" category, [3] article including store, and so on. Collect (talk) 11:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A consumer retail business that exists in multiple localities is highly likely to receive adequate coverage in edited sources, and this article already shows that it does. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines specifically mention profiles like Hoovers or BusinessWeek as sources, in this case there are both. Drawn Some (talk) 16:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve-- Sources are available to establish notability for this chain with 133 stores, [4]. --J^mundo 21:15, 22 May 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.