Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circle 7 logo

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. - Daniel.Bryant 10:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Circle 7 logo[edit]

Original research, unverifiable, does not establish subject's notability. See also the AfD discussion for BBC One logos. —tregoweth (talk) 05:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. - SVRTVDude ^{(Yell - Toil)} 06:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

strong delete per nomOo7565 06:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Keep. Why is it that some people refuse to see the historical aspect of logos? -- azumanga 17:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It's a well-established enough logo in the industry that it deserves an article. Amnewsboy 22:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article's very first paragraph states (and stated before this nomination): "The Circle 7 logo is one of the most classic and familiar television station logos in the United States. First designed in the 1960s for the ABC Television Network's five owned and operated stations (O&Os), the logo, or a version of it, is currently being used by a number of TV broadcasters around the world," which certainly establishes the subject's notability. The material is certainly verifiable: 1150 Google hits for "Circle 7 Logo". Article needs references, but lack of references does not indicate material is unverifiable, or we'd have about 1 million fewer articles on Wikipedia. Firsfron of Ronchester 03:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's notable, needs some work since some aren't exactly circle 7's but hey, I'm from Boston, and we use the WSVN varation of the Circle 7. Heck, we've used 3 circle 7s! --Saint-Paddy 18:34, 23 February 2007 (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.