Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Miller (mattress retailer)

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. The only significant part is the advertising, which is already covered in the company article. JohnCD (talk) 17:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Miller (mattress retailer)[edit]

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

Non-notable retailer. Of the five refs in the article, one is to his company website, one is to his own blog. There's a brief mention of him in this LA Times article, but he's not the subject of it; the Furniture Today story is about the company, not him; and the only things that comes near substantial coverage is this article in Smart Business mag. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the significant part is already covered in Sit 'n Sleep. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:56, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep For those of us in Southern California who hear this incessant advertising, Larry Miller as a personality is up there with local advertising legends Cal Worthington and Madman Muntz as a memorable character, which is the point. And Crazy Gideon probably deserves his own article. Certainly he has paid for his fame in cash, and has annoyed the public in the process. If you aren't from Southern California, he might not seem significant and I'll suggest you shouldn't be commenting. Trackinfo (talk) 01:01, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- As already pointed out, the advertising is covered in the Sit 'n Sleep article. There's no reason to duplicate the information, especially not at this less-likely title. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 04:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. — Jujutacular ^T · C 16:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. — Jujutacular ^T · C 16:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not individually notable. The article on the company is sufficient. DGG ( talk ) 04:06, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Sit 'n Sleep. SilkTork *^YES! 15:12, 6 January 2010 (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.