Deletion of Muir Skate Longboard Shop

Comment: I can't find significant coverage for this |company
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: local notability only shown.  Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: A few local and one international source is enough to meet  Special:Contributions/74.103.239.178|74.103.239.178
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: per , , .  And frankly, the canvassing attempts noted above don't exactly do the article any favours, either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP||WP:N||WP:V)

Comment: per Libstar. If the phases "significant coverage" and "non-trivial" mean anything at all, then surely this fails , or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CORP)

Comment: there have been 3 not so random |single purpose editors "voting" here not to mention potential canvassing
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA)

Comment: ndash; Completely fails . The http://www.silverfishlongboarding.com/forum/general-longboarding/138480-save-muir-skates-wikipedia-page.html canvassing attempts make my position more firm. Calling deletionists "douches" doesn't help your case one bit. (Note that {{user|PÆonU}} is blocked
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: This might be hard for some to believe but I'm new at this sort of thing. I've been relisting and closing AFDs for a few years but until now, almost all my nominations have been of the hoaxy variety. Slam dunk deletes and I have no problem doing my best to get |bullshit deleted. I don't like telling good faith editors who create pages on subjects that they care about that their submissions are not "good enough" for Wikipedia. In this case, I found the article doing new page patrol and it seemed like a cut and dry case of a company with little or no notability outside of the local area
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Complete bollocks (WP:BALLS)

Comment: to something, Im not familiar with the area but if there is a category/article that includes stuff relating to campus culture it would make sense to have it there. This might be construed as a  argument but almost all major universities have a bunch of peripheral businesses that are only notable because they are within walking distance of campus and everyone who has attended has been there, e.g. Harvard Book Store Grolier Poetry Bookshop
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: Fails . The coverage I'm seeing is not very significant. "Concrete Wave"? Yeah, so? Notabilty just because it was on a campus? I'm sure there is a maintainence shed near the athletic fields too, but I doubt it's notable either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: I read the article in ''Concrete Wave'', which has been referred to throughout this AfD discussion as an "international magazine" - at a guess, "international" is intended to mean "outside the US" as ''Concrete Wave'' is published in Canada, but that's just my guess - in any case it's not a local publication. The same applies to the ''Transworld Business'' site which mentioned the store in 2006. These two articles are, however, not enough to show that the company meets  to my mind - they do not constitute significant coverage in multiple independent publications. All the misbehaviour and canvassing don't exactly help the article's case, but even if it hadn't happened I don't see how the article could be saved. (Yes, I have searched for additional sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: per nom.  Fails  despite the addition of a couple of obscure references
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)