Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pet Butler

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 per lack of reliable sources found. The article only provides press releases and a source that mentions the company trivially, and no one has provided concrete examples of suitable sources. — TKD::Talk 11:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pet Butler (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Artice reads like an ad and gives unnecessary list of places it services. Was originally tagged as WP:CSD#G11 but it has been around a while and may have some salvageable content so I am bringing it here for the community to review. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 06:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Looking back at the history it seems it may have been deleted before and recreated. In any event, it blatantly fails WP:CSD#G11. Oodles of advertising doesn't make content. bfigura ^(talk) 06:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Pet Butler should probably copy and paste everything before it's deleted - this would make a great website for the company. Zchris87v 07:40, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - it just needs rewriting. Currently, it is written like an advert and displays examples of POV, but the company certainly isn't non-noteable from what I've seen on Google and Yahoo and the references that are provided. Requires clean-up operation to make it worthy enough to be called a Wikipedia article. Lradrama 10:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep sounds like a notable service, but the article needs some cleanup, with the locations list going first. Nenyedi • ^{(Deeds•Talk)} 13:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Blatantly spam. Don't know how you can rewrite it without a continuation of spam.
• Delete I didnt know such a service existed, so there might be room for an article on the business niche in general, but this company isnt notable--13 locations only. DGG (talk) 20:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Maybe if they were a publicly traded company and had some historical reference. This is a small pet business. Not much notable. It's apparent it is here for advertising. No content here, just advertising.
• Delete - seems like an ad to me. A quick scan through the references shows that they're mostly from the company itself. _TheIslander 21:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep -- Back in June I took a shot at deleting the pure advertising from the article -- this revision was what I came up with. It was reverted a month later by an apparent single-purpose editor (edit summary : "restoring after vandalism") to a version nearly identical to the current one. I think the non-advertising version is in the 'barely notable' category, and would keep that one, but the current article doesn't cut it. -- ArglebargleIV 05:54, 18 August 2007 (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.