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.
KTC (
talk) 13:43, 19 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Piece has strongly promotional tone, despite having cleaned out the large number of inappropriate external links. Additionally, the focus of the supplied sources appears to be Partridge's business
Sevenly rather than Partridge himself. Given that, the notability of the article's subject appears, in my eyes, to be distinctly borderline and worth consulting the community about.
Dolescum (
talk) 03:23, 4 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete. The focus is indeed far more on Sevenly than on Partridge. The sources are about the success story of the store and most of them are about Apple or other companies and based mainly on interviews. A promotional piece masquerding as a bio. --
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (
talk) 10:16, 4 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Tom Morris (
talk) 15:34, 11 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete Lack of material and lack of importance. DGG (
talk ) 16:45, 18 January 2015 (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.