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. -- Cirt (talk) 07:00, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gepida[edit]

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

A "Self-declined WP:A7". There is no doubt that this company WP:EXISTS, but I can't see significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of this bicycle manufacturer. As always, more than happy to be proven wrong. Shirt58 (talk) 13:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I've fleshed the article out a little and added a 3rd-party ref. PamD (talk) 14:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Enough coverage in all those bike magazines. They have scans on their web site of all the articles. Clever. FuFoFuEd (talk) 08:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. There seems to be enough coverage at http://www.gepida.hu/eng-hun/company-intruduction/media/eng_pr/ to meet WP:GNG. Eluchil404 (talk) 06:41, 16 June 2011 (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.