Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anova Culinary

:{{la|Anova Culinary}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anova_Culinary Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Anova Culinary}})

I am closing this discussion and keeping the article. I believe this article can be cleaned up. The article has plenty of sources and is relevant enough to stay. AmericanAir88 (talk) 04:34, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

In effect, an advertisement. I advised the contributor to remove some of the listing of routine product features, such as keeping things warm, but they thought it essential to the article. DGG ( talk ) 01:10, 27 August 2017 (UTC) DGG ( talk ) 01:10, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:59, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

:: I responded to you DGG and made edits as you pointed out. I discussed it giving my own opinion and did say that to which I didn't receive a response:

:::"If you have other opinions, or perspective, please go ahead and update to what you see is right. We can discuss it there in the talk page if necessary. I can't get it perfect alone and that should be your priority instead of leaving me alone with the updates or it gets deleted."

::Again, if you have an opinion on what should be done, go ahead instead of deleting my work entirely. And I deleted the 'warm' sentence btw. Have a great day! Kellyhei (talk) 22:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Keep. Yes, the article probably needs a good dose of cleanup, but that's not a reason to delete it. I see plenty of sources to meet WP:GNG. —C.Fred (talk) 22:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Keep This article needs a ton of cleanup and some reworking of sections but those are not valid reasons to delete the article. The article has plenty of sources and is relevant enough to stay. I will try to save and fix this article. AmericanAir88 (talk) 04:11, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.