Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boxing Bear 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Boxing Bear Brewing Company

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

Trivial awards. No first place national award. The references are local papers, and therefore not sufficiently discriminating to be reliable for notability. DGG ( talk ) 23:03, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:42, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:42, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:00, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Local business with expected local coverage in home city. Not notable. Article created by SPA, clearly promotional. MB 21:59, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:05, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:30, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- the awards are non-notable; the coverage is strictly local. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and the nomination is exact with shoeing these concerns, none of it escapes the areas of PR and unconvincing information and sources, there's nothing to suggest even at least convincing substance. SwisterTwister talk 23:25, 29 August 2016 (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.