Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fire Crown Productions

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fire Crown Productions[edit]

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

The subject of the article appears to lack notability. The article is based entirely on primary sources, and appears to have been created and edited primarily by an affiliated person and his or her sockpuppets. Related link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stealing Mary. JohnInDC (talk) 12:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:CORP. -SFK2 (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep - Qualifies WP:CORP as it is known province wide and has secondary sources from the province and also has a mention in the Association of Producers of the Province which qualifies the Production company under WP:CORP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Createart101 (talk • contribs) 13:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]

- please back up your assertion that CORP is met with appropriate sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I've been on the fence about this one, but have come down on the side of deletion. There was a claim in the article that they had won awards for their films, but all I can find is a third place in the documentary category at the San Luis Obispo International Film Festival, and that doesn't make for notability. Since there is no significant coverage to be found in secondary sources (and I have looked!), I can only conclude that it does not in fact meet WP:CORP or WP:GNG. --bonadea contributions talk 09:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not out of ill-will, but because it fails to meet our standards of notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Utterly non-notable 78.105.23.161 (talk) 07:53, 24 October 2013 (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.