Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rocky Patel Premium Cigars

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. JGHowes ^talk 01:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Patel Premium Cigars[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not demonstrate its own notability, edit history demonstrates it to be a promotional article. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 15:14, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:58, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:58, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete clearly an advert article and doesn't pass the notability guidelines anyway. Therefore, there's zero reason to have the article. Wikipedia isn't a business directory. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:45, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - a news search brings back plenty of hits. An advert (that does not qualify for G11) should be cleaned up and rewritten, not deleted. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:41, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:06, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep due to at least two analyst reports available on this company which meet the criteria for establishing notability. Delete None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability. "Plenty of hits" also isn't a reason because all the hits I can find fail WP:NCORP. I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content which are the requirements, topic therefore fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 23:32, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To me, that sounds as credible as "I voted for Brexit because I want to take back our sovereignty and make our own laws and stop people coming over here taking our jobs". I note that a Google News search for "Rocky Patel" cigars brings back at least 12 pages of new hits. Per the relevant explanatory note, "searches using Google's specialty tools, such as ... Google News, are more likely to return reliable sources that can be useful in improving articles". That some of the results are what Have I Got News For You might consider "special guest publications" such as Cigar Journal and Cigar Affictionado shouldn't matter - indeed, should we not look for expert sources on a topic in order to improve it? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:19, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how that Brexit argument applies. For me, it's like the Remainers keep pointing out the rules and laws but the Brexiters insist they don't apply because they're sure they must be right. But, that said, I have changed my !vote as I have located analyst reports on this company that easily meet the criteria for establishing notability. They are covered, for example, by QYResearch and ResearchAndMarkets and others too. HighKing⁺⁺ 22:43, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I was able to add more information from the existing references, which show that teh company has made an impact in its industry and achieved independent coverage in multiple publications over an extended period. I added 2 more of the lounges and referenced all of them in local press coverage, and tracked down the exact year of foundation, the current corporate location, and the reason for the original name. Yngvadottir (talk) 10:37, 15 November 2020 (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.