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. On head-counting alone this is no consensus, but the delete arguments asked for multiple reliable sources asserting notability, and the keep argument never really addressed this. Daniel 03:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double Double Pizza[edit]

Double Double Pizza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Repeating my PROD rationale: "Fails WP:CORP; no independent sources cited, none added since January." PROD was contested per comment on talk page. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 16:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Subject does not seem notable ffm 16:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No secondary sources sited and thus fails notability test. --BlindEagle^{talk~contribs} 16:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Double double delete per the nominator. Burntsauce 17:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changing to KEEP there appears to be some minor evidence of notability here, much more so than a South African restaurant favored by someone here. Burntsauce 17:24, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Article needs improvement, but just the quickest of Google searches brings up a number of independent sources, and a 70+ member franchise is reasonably notable.Kww 17:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Sounds like it would be a tasty pizza topping. That'd be more notable than the food chain in fact.Operating 17:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Adding -com to a Google search took it down to 84 hits, most of which are directory listings. There were also a couple of health violations, but I'll assume they don't want to be notable for that. MarkBul 18:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I suppose the health violations here would make it NPOV? Just kidding. Too bad this is taking double double the efforts to get rid of an obviously unfixable, unsourceable stub. I have a favorite pizza place too. It's double double good. It's not in Wikipedia. Keeper | 76 18:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A restaurant chain that has more than 50 franchises and is growing is notable. This is not just a neighborhood pizza joint. Mandsford 21:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • But where are substantial independent sources? Google give mainly business-directory entries and the like. --B. Wolterding 17:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep reasonable size chain. JJL 17:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It has a website and 50 resturants Chandlerjoeyross 22:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I also just did a News Canada archive search and got all of three hits for the chain: two listings in another company's PR and one where an employee fought off a would-be robber. I don't see verifiable notability there. —C.Fred (talk) 21:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:V Secret 21:10, 1 October 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.