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The result was Speedy Keep, withdrawn by the nominator. Ichibani 17:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Delete. Not notable. The article lacks reliable sources, and is only linked to from the mainspace in the article about its founder. Ichibani 22:06, 16 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Withdrawn because the article does focus on the shoes more than the company better than I considered. Ichibani 17:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The Starbury is a notable sneaker brand, mainly because it is so much cheaper than any other basketball shoe endorsed by an NBA player. It's the subject of multiple newspaper articles, as a quick Google News archive search will show. There seem to be some clean-up issues, but that's not a matter for AFD. Zagalejo 01:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Then perhaps the sneaker should have an article about it, not the company. I saw absolutely no articles about the company, in the article or my own search. Furthermore, being the cheapest NBA-player-endorsed shoe is no argument for notabilty; that'd be as useful as mentioning some brand of shoe just because the president wears it. Ichibani 04:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hence the posting of a google news-search which got plenty of results discussing the shoe specifically for its low price. Significant third-party coverage in a number of places. I think that means notable. FrozenPurpleCube 04:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the Starbury One is probably the most famous individual Starbury product. I suppose we could rework the article to be primarily about that specific shoe, but that discussion could take place outside of AFD.
To counter your second point, though: it most certainly is notable that an NBA player is endorsing a $14.98 shoe when the Air Jordans are selling for almost 12x that price. We really have to look at the Starbury shoe in context. Since the late 80s, if not earlier, major sneaker companies have been marketing expensive basketball shoes to inner city youth who could not afford them. At times, this has led kids to kill each other over footwear. The Starbury sneakers have received a huge amount of press, and with good reason, considering the recent history of NBA shoe endorsements and the socioeconomic realities of the target markets. Zagalejo 05:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the article could indeed use more reliable sources. [1] Bam. There you go. The Denver Post? USA Today? BusinessWeek? Should satisfy anybody. FrozenPurpleCube 03:20, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep company easily satisfies notability guidelines. Article needs to be NPOV, but there are plenty of independent sources to use in writing suh an article. Capmango 04:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Could use some better sources but is easily notable - Pharaonic 10:54, 17 June 2007 (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.