Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rorgue

: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 keep. Weak keep. Improve please! SarahStierch (talk) 22:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

=[[Rorgue]]=

:{{la|Rorgue}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rorgue Stats])

:({{Find sources|Rorgue}})

Article on a French manufacturer of cooking stoves/ranges. Notability isn't really asserted in the article - being a 100+ year old company doesn't imply notability. The Daily Mail article mentions the company once as a brand name of an installed appliance. The LR link (in French) is about Rorgue solely, but (a) it's one article, and (b) it's not clear to me whether it meets the guidelines for secondary sources. The two external links are to a reseller and a corporate overview respectively. Google didn't turn up much. Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

:{{#if:yes|Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. |{{error|This template must be substituted!}}}} • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

:{{#if:yes|Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. |{{error|This template must be substituted!}}}} • Gene93k (talk) 01:54, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Weak keep. In addition to the LR link, there are some mentions available online that really hint towards notability: [http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=dlFWAAAAMAAJ&q=%22Rorgue%22+cuisines&dq=%22Rorgue%22+cuisines&source=bl&ots=SZZpg8JWwR&sig=PvmOC2DB7D8FdeoP5UyMIH8E7dg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7BEpUJeZBa3G6AGOp4DgDQ&redir_esc=y] [http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=63gsAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Rorgue%22+cuisines&dq=%22Rorgue%22+cuisines&source=bl&ots=fLRjqnx2eg&sig=W2VFsM7uGwxKTmOvjurtDeVHcdk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7BEpUJeZBa3G6AGOp4DgDQ&redir_esc=y] [http://www.caterersearch.com/Articles/22/02/1996/24526/Spending-spree.htm] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/feb/15/homesandgardens.shopping] [http://www.caterersearch.com/Articles/20/07/2000/28215/Fitting-out-the-Ritz.htm] [http://www.nyrestaurantinsider.com/jan2007-ramsay.asp]. Based on those I think it's very likely there's additional coverage available offline — Frankie (talk) 15:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:44, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 04:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Weak keep - Just meets WP:GNG per the sources presented above by User:Frankie. Northamerica1000^(talk) 20:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Weak keep – There does indeed appear to be some significant coverage. I also see [http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Beauty+Style%3A+Cooking+up+a+stylish+storm%3B+Fancy,+flashy+kitchens+are...-a0118223297 this] in the Birmingham Post, [http://mail-on-sunday.vlex.co.uk/vid/recipe-ideal-kitchen-lots-plenty-oven-62450479 this] in the Mail on Sunday, and (offline only) "The man's guide to really, really big stuff", Margolis, Jonathan. Sunday Times [London (UK)] 03 Oct 2004: 83. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

: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.