Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fatcat Ballroom & Dance Company

Fatcat Ballroom & Dance Company

Fatcat Ballroom & Dance Company (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:ORG with no indication of notability, no reliable sources, commercial websites only. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 20:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

• Weak delete per the lack of multiple reliable sources. Most of the sources in the article don't even mention this topic. I did find this article (archived link) from The Arizona Republic, but one source is not enough to establish notability. If a second source can be found, I will change my vote to keep. Cunard (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

• Reference added to the Arizona Girl Scouts program with Fatcat Ballroom. The fact that a nationally syndicated agency has a program setup with the company adds validity to the article being kept for inclusion. Neuromancer (talk) 08:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

• Sorry, but this page is a program page that mentions Fatcat Ballroom only in passing. Furthermore, it is from a source that is not independent of the company. For this article to be kept, we need significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Can you find another article about Fatcat Ballroom & Dance Company in a newspaper or magazine? Cunard (talk) 19:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

• Additional reference added to Arizona Central New Year's Eve Events. Neuromancer (talk) 01:10, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

• I looked at the additional source, but it does not provide significant coverage. This source only lists Fatcat Ballroom & Dance Company as the location of a fundraiser. Sufficient sources that provide nontrivial coverage would be sources such as this source that I mentioned in my initial comment. Fatcat Ballroom is the main topic in that article. Cunard (talk) 05:54, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

• Is an FCC licensed radio station program interview considered significant coverage? It is a 10 min, 30 second interview of the owner, and it was a statewide broadcast on July 30th, 2008. Neuromancer (talk) 06:23, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, I would consider that interview significant coverage. The interview, coupled with The Arizona Republic source, pushes this company over the notability guidelines for companies. Therefore, I have changed my vote to keep. Cunard (talk) 06:30, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

• Keep Neuromancer (talk) 00:15, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

• Comment to clarify my listing in light of subsequent changes to the article: AfD per WP:ORG, WP:SPAM. One brief article in a local newspaper and an interview of one of the founders on a local radio station do not seem to establish notability through "significant coverage" as required by WP:ORG. The remaining four sources for this article are of the type specifically deprecated by "Primary criteria" in WP:ORG: "(for examples) newspaper articles that simply report meeting times or extended shopping hours, or the publications of telephone numbers, addresses, and directions in business directories". There is a business by this name, but notability has not been established. Additionally, evidence suggests that the author, User:Neuromancer, is conflicted. This article was the first contribution by the user, and early versions contained WP:BLP-violating and other unsourced information about individuals associated with the business, including a claim of a secret love affair. This information, unavailable in any given source, appears to have been based on personal knowledge, and the user has also placed him- or herself in the Phoenix, Arizona area by editing from a local IP address during a block for disruptive editing. It looks like spam, and I suspect it is. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Comment This is most certainly not spam, and the insinuation otherwise is inappropriate. Yes, this was my first article to WP. Yes, I know of the studio. No I am not affiliated with the studio. I chose an innocuous topic in which to write an initial article, and as I am sure you can see, it went through a number of revisions as I honed my skills on WP. Neuromancer (talk) 03:57, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- - 2/0 (cont.) 21:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Comment Article conforms to notability guidelines for companies and does not violate any WP policies or guidelines. Neuromancer (talk) 03:27, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete fails relevant notability guidelines (no sig coverage in anything other than local rags). Verbal chat 21:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
• Keep It gets coverage on the radio station mentioned, and in newspapers. And is associated with a major organization like the Girl Scouts. Dream Focus 16:20, 10 November 2009 (UTC)