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. Withdrawn by nominator, no delete !votes, meets notability guidelines, no point in keeping this open. Although I'm technically involved in the discussion, that would seem to be irrelevant in this case because there are no remaining contentious issues. (non-admin closure) -- Trevj (talk) 23:15, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Breyer horse[edit]

Breyer horse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Smells a lot like spam, no references support why the company Breyer is notable enough to have a separate page (besides, any notable content could easily be included in model horse 1292simon (talk) 09:52, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:NCORP/WP:PRODUCT. Should probably be moved to Breyer Animal Creations. Per WP:BEFORE, the company clearly meets the notability criteria.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] AFD is not cleanup, so spam concerns should be addressed by editing the existing article. -- Trevj (talk) 14:18, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Trevj. Breyer horses are very well known collectibles. Searches for "Breyer horse" and "Breyer animal" turn up hundreds of GNews hits [12][13]. --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:NOTABILITY. This is THE major manufacturer of collectible horse figurines in the USA with at least a 50+ year history. Article is weak and has issues, but there is no question that the company is worthy of having its own article. Makes no sense to merge into Model horse, as it would dominate that other article creating a WP:UNDUE problem that would not be fair to other types of models. I have no opinion one way of the other on the idea of moving it to a new title reflecting the company name, though no objections. Montanabw^(talk) 20:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep sorry for the fuss. On the basis of the info above I now realise it should be kept and renamed to Breyer Animal Collections. It would be great if some people could help improve it, it has been in a poor state for a long time. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 21:35, 3 November 2012 (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.