Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr Fables

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 No consensus; default to keep - this article has been floating around AfD for quite some time (at least 15 days) and has been relisted 3 times. I think its time to close this discussion. Foxy Loxy ^Pounce! 08:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Fables

No sources found. Unsourced since 12/07. No notability asserted besides a long run in Grand Rapids. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I found [1] which takes about their trademark, this article [2] that talks about the breakup, many, many references in passing, and dozens of people trying to locate their old recipes. While I can't find a dead-on source, I get the feeling that this was an insanely popular chain that went of biz for some reason or another. I hate to see the article go without more confidence that they are really not notable (not the nom's fault). It went out of business before the Internet became popular, which may explain why sources are hard to find, excepting the fans of the food looking for the recipes and such. This is just one of those articles that I feel there IS something missing, and we just dont have easy access to the information, thus I will just stay neutral after searching. PHARMBOY (TALK) 22:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, treelo _radda 00:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up After searching Google news using all dates for "Mr. Fables" food I found some weak references that might pan out if I felt like spending money to see. NewsPaperArchive.com claims to have 32 articles for instance. Being verifiable only by pay ads should never stop an article from being considered sourced (policy doesn't say sourced for free) BUT I can't say that there are solid wp:rs behind that pay wall. I would lean more toward keep on faith, but I can't image sourcing this now out of business company will be easier in the future. Again, my gut says they ARE notable enough but they were preinternet, and I can't figure out how to satisfy policy in this. I tried, but have to stay neutral. Thats a lot of work to not take a stand... PHARMBOY (TALK) 01:19, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, kur ykh 07:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's going to be a little harder to find cites on articles like these because the chain went under in the previous decade, when there wasn't as much internet coverage, but this shouldn't make it impossible to find sources, and it doesn't make it non-notable. Fumoses (talk) 13:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:39, 27 October 2008 (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.