This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (This article is an unbiased article writing about a coffee company located in Canada. This article does not advertise and cannot make any type of revenue. This page has not been created by an associate or employee of Balzac's Coffee Roasters. This page was created to uphold Canadian companies so that more people can learn about Canadian culture. ) --Thewisetent (talk) 03:12, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article was marked under WP:CSD A7 (no credible indication of importance) no for advertising, bias or any of the other things you mentioned. Wikipedia is not a place for information about everything. The articles on Wikipedia need to be about things that meet certin notability guidlines. PhantomTech (talk) 03:17, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Explain if you will how articles such as Starbucks, Second Cup, etc. are created, maintained, and edited. I have not sourced anything yet because article is unfinished, and incomplete. I am still in the process of sourcing, and linking article to third-party articles (topics, keywords etc.). The article which I have created is not a secondary hosting service for a company nor is it intended to be promotional. Material written, is fact and can be source from credible sites. Content stored therein is not referenced from a blog, or social networking service.--Thewisetent (talk) 03:25, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Like the edit notice says, "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." If there were at least a few sources in place, it would be easier to let the article go while you work on it. If you like, the article can be moved to either your user space or an Articles for creation space, so you can work on it without the threat of immediate deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 03:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the interim, I declined the speedy delete. What I found on a Google search was a story about the store appearing on Dragon's Den. That tells me there's likely been media coverage of the store, so there's a valid assertion that the store is notable. At the worst, that buys it another week of deletion discussions. —C.Fred (talk) 03:39, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thewisetent, when you create articles in the future please make sure they do not qualify for a WP:CSD. If you don't have the time to make the first version of a new article meet all of the guildelines, like C.Fred said, make the article in your userspace first and then move it when it is more complete. The reference C.Fred found means the article doesn't qualify for WP:CSD A7 and as long as you can find a few more it should be able to easily show WP:NOTABILITY if a deletion discussion happens. PhantomTech (talk) 04:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
