Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Koma Unwind

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. Moving to Bebida Beverage Company as discussed. If expansion and improvement does not occur, can be renominated as required. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 09:17, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Koma Unwind[edit]

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

Failure of sources to establish notability. All sources I could find are either press releases, blogs, or extremely trivial passing blurbs. Grayfell (talk) 04:26, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A passing mention in Business Week plus a press release - not sufficient for meeting WP:GNG. Might be merged into the company article (if it existed and if the company was notable - I have no opinion on that one way or the other). GregorB (talk) 08:11, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:29, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:29, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename to Bebida Beverage Company and expand to be about the company as a whole - there appears to be sufficient data out there to establish notability for the company. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious what you found, all I came up with was stock quotes and a huge volume of press releases. Grayfell (talk) 08:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename to Bebida Beverage Company (BeBevCo). Articles such as this establish enough notability to warrant inclusion. Candleabracadabra (talk) 14:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per the above arguments. The company seems notable; Koma Unwind does not. Andrew³²⁷ 15:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 19:38, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment For the company I see very little information besides the stock references. It is a beverage company with one popular beverage. Would the NASCAR sponsorship validate it as a notable company? Judicatus | Talk 21:36, 2 August 2013 (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.