Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Louis Wine and Beermaking

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. Consensus of uninvolved users is that there is insufficient significant coverage to demonstrate notability. ~ mazca ^talk 14:08, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

St. Louis Wine and Beermaking[edit]

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

I originally speedily deleted this but has been re-created with some signs that speedy no longer applies (i.e. has some reviews from local sites). However, the reviews do not seem to pass the WP:N bar for me. I would still advocate for a deletion. Sasquatch t|c 21:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Local shop with local coverage. -- Whpq (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note - Notability has nothing to do with the geographical area of its impact.Arm the homeless (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply - It is of consideration. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria. -- Whpq (talk) 16:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notable on a local, regional and national level, its notability is however part of a niche group of people. see homebrewing. Arm the homeless (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Although I've declined my own speedy tag on this incarnation of the article on the basis of sources added, these sources do not show anything but local notability. Google News has nothing of note about them. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:36, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - They provide educational value to the internet community. And they seem to have as many references as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwest_Supplies, a similar company, which isn't listed under AFD.--DavidDeaton231 (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Other articles's existence on Wikipedia don't have a bearing whether this article should be kept. Perhaps the other article should also be deleted. Or perhaps there are sources for it that just haven't been added. But in any case, this article will be kept or deleted based on how it meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. -- Whpq (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article's subject does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH; the only possibly RS (the small Riverfront Times piece) reads like an advert—typical chamber of commerce stuff. Miniapolis 12:19, 29 April 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.